Volume 19, Issue 6 |

December | January 2013

®

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

GeorgiaEngineerthe

Savannah Harbor

Expansion Programa regional project with national impact

2 The GeorGia enGineer

DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013 3

Publisher: A4 Inc.1154 Lower Birmingham Road

Canton, Georgia 30115Tel.: 770-521-8877 • Fax: 770-521-0406

E-mail: p.frey@a4inc.com

Managing Editor: Roland Petersen-FreyArt Direction/Design: Pamela Petersen-Frey

Georgia Engineering Alliance233 Peachtree Street • Harris Tower, #700

Atlanta, Georgia 30303Tel.: 404-521-2324 • Fax: 404-521-0283

Georgia Engineering AllianceGwen Brandon, CAE, Director of Operations

Thomas C. Leslie, PE, Director of External Affairs

Georgia Engineering Alliance Editorial BoardJimmy St. John, PE, Chairman

GSPE RepresentativesSam Fleming, PETim Glover, PE

ACEC/G RepresentativesB.J. Martin, PE

Lee Philips

ASCE/G RepresentativesDaniel Agramonte, PESteven C. Seachrist, PE

GMCEA RepresentativeBirdel F. Jackson, III, PE

ITE RepresentativesDaniel Dobry, PE, PTOE

John Edwards, PE

ITS/G RepresentativesBill Wells, PE

Shaun Green, PEKay Wolfe, PE

WTS RepresentativeAngela Snyder

ASHE RepresentativeJenny Jenkins, PE

SEAOG RepresentativeRob Wellacher, PE

GeorgiaEngineerthe

The Georgia Engineer is published bi-monthly by A4 Inc. for the Georgia EngineeringAlliance and sent to members of ACEC, ASCE, ASHE, GMCEA, GEF, GSPE, ITE, SEAOG,WTS; local, state, and Federal government officials and agencies; businesses and institutions.Opinions expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of the Alliance or publisher nor dothey accept responsibility for errors of content or omission and, as a matter of policy, neitherdo they endorse products or advertisements appearing herein. Parts of this periodical may be re-produced with the written consent from the Alliance and publisher. Correspondence regardingaddress changes should be sent to the Alliance at the address above. Correspondence regardingadvertising and editorial material should be sent to A4 Inc. at the address listed above.

4 The GeorGia enGineer

Advert isementsAlbany Tech. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Atkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44Ayres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41Burns & McDonnell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Cardno TBE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23CDM Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Chastain & Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Columbia Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44CROM Prestressed Concrete Tanks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Cummins Power South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Engineered Restorations Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7GEL | Geophysics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Georgia Concrete Paving Association. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Georgia Power Company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inside Back CoverGreater Traffic Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Hayward Baker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Back CoverHazen and Sawyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4HDR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Heath & Lineback Engineers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24HNTB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44Innovative Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 25JAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Keck & Wood Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17M.H. Miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Middleton-House & Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Photo Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Pond & Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Power Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Prime Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Reinforced Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32RHD Utility Locating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Rosser International. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6RSH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Santa Ed & Elf Evie. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Schnabel Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Silt-Saver Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Southern Civil Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Stevenson & Palmer Engineering Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6STV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17T. Wayne Owens & Associates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Terrell Hundley Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17THC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41TTL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11United Consulting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inside Front CoverUzun & Case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44Wilburn Engineering LLC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Willmer Engineering Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Wolverton & Associates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Woodard & Curran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

5DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

THE GEORGIA ENGINEER December 2012 | January 2013

GSPE41

ASCE39

ITE42

ACEC37

ITS45

ASHE36

SEAOG

GMCEAGEA

GEF WTS

8 Savannah Harbor Expansion ProgramA regional project with a national impact

11 The Newly Reorganized Georgia Engineering Alliance:Collaborative Advocacy

12 Tunnel HillThe last link from Georgia to the West

18 Georgia’s New “False Claims Act”New risks and burdens of state and local public works contracting

22 Q & A with Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp

26 Recap of the 2012 Transportation Summit

28 The GPTQ Awards

32 What’s in the NEWS

34 WTS Annual Scholarship Luncheon Goes Swimmingly Well

n October 26, the AssistantSecretary of the Army (CivilWorks) Jo-Ellen Darcy signed

the long-awaited Record of Decisionfor the Savannah Harbor ExpansionProject (SHEP) to proceed from theevaluation phase into the constructionphase. More than 12 years have passedsince the US Army Corps of Engineers(USACE) began its official studies intodeepening the Savannah Harbor to ac-commodate the larger Post-Panamaxships expected to bring cargo to theUnited States following the PanamaCanal expansion.v

O

6 The GeorGia enGineer

Visit: thegeorgiaengineer.com

The Georgia Engineer Web site

is new and improved!

www.thegeorgiaengineer.com

7DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

Savannah HarborExpansion Program

By Pamela Little, PE | EcoWise Civil Design & Consulting Inc.

a regional project with national impact

8 The GeorGia enGineer

9DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

n October 26, the Assistant Secretary of theArmy (Civil Works) Jo-Ellen Darcy signedthe long-awaited Record of Decision for theSavannah Harbor Expansion Project (SHEP)to proceed from the evaluation phase intothe construction phase. More than 12 years

have passed since the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) beganits official studies into deepening the Savannah Harbor to accom-modate the larger Post-Panamax ships expected to bring cargo to theUnited States following the Panama Canal expansion.

In August 2012, the Corps issued the final Chief of EngineersReport on the project with a recommendation to dredge the harborto a 47-foot depth adding five feet to the current 42-foot depth.The report was released just one month after President Obamanamed the project to the We Can’t Wait initiative for expediting in-frastructure projects expected to have exceptional regional and na-tional benefits.

The importance of the SHEP to the regional and nationaleconomies was emphasized at the October 30, 2012, State of thePorts Luncheon hosted by the Georgia Chamber of Commerce,where Governor Nathan Deal called the Port of Savannah, “an eco-nomic driver for the state of Georgia.” A delegation of individualsfrom Georgia, including Gov. Deal and Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed,has been working to ensure federal funding will be available for theproject. Geographical and political boundaries have been put asideto ensure the success of the expansion and to help it move forward.

The total cost of the project has been estimated at $652 mil-lion. The cost will be shared between the federal government andthe non-federal sponsor, the Georgia Department of Transportation(GDOT). A Project Partnership Agreement (PPA) will be drafted to

define the terms and responsibilities of the Corps and GDOT. ThePPA and an authorization from Congress for the budgeted cost of theproject are the final two steps in a long, involved process to author-ize the expansion.

Congress conditionally authorized the SHEP in 1999 with the‘unique’ requirement that the Corps consult with the Secretary ofthe Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Administrator ofEPA and gain their approval on the selected improvement plan aswell as the associated mitigation plan before entering the construc-tion phase. This is the only Corps deepening project to require suchan approval.

If the project is fully funded by Congress each year per the rec-ommendations in the project plan, it is expected to be complete bythe end of 2017. It is expected to take only four years to build theproject that was conceptualized in the late 1990s.

Over its 50-year lifecycle, the expansion is expected to reduceshipping costs by $174 million per year for US companies, thereby

lowering costs for imported goods purchased byconsumers. This project has a 5.5:1 benefit-to-cost ratio, meaning that for every $1 spent onthe project, the country is expected to earn a re-turn of $5.50. Positive effects from the projectare expected as far west as Dallas and as far northas Illinois. USACE Savannah District Com-mander and District Engineer, Col. Jeffrey Hall,said the project, “… will create jobs and improvethe nation’s waterways as well as our nation’sglobal competitiveness.”

By increasing the depth of the harborjust five feet, the port will be able to accom-modate over 78 percent more cargo per ship-ment. Today, the largest shipments the harborreceives are approximately 4,600 twenty-footequivalent containers (TEUs). Once the proj-ect is complete, it is expected to be able to re-ceive up to 8,200 TEUs on a single carrier.

With so many economic benefits ex-pected from the project, it may be surprisingthat approval for the project took so long.When asked, Col. Hall indicated that the study

period was appropriate for this particular project and was necessaryto find the right balance between economic benefit and environ-mental impacts. He added that in the future, similar feasibility stud-ies could be reduced by narrowing the scope of the project from thebeginning and applying SMART— Specific, Measurable, Attainable,Risk Informed, and Timely—criteria to the project goals.

The extensive study period and paperwork generated for theproject influenced a new goal to reduce Corps studies to a maximumof three years and $3 million. When lined up side-by-side on a con-ference room table, the study documents, including sixty-four (64)engineering studies conducted on the SHEP, take up twelve feet inlength. These studies also took over a decade and over $46 millionto complete.

O

10 The GeorGia enGineer

The results of such extensive studies areimpressive. Just less than half of the budgetfor the project will be spent to evaluate,monitor, and mitigate environmental im-pacts. The feasibility studies also involvedconsultation with other agencies such as the

Georgia Ports Authority (GPA) and GDOTto determine, what, if any, improvementswere on their schedules to address growthwhether the harbor was deepened or not. Asa result of the feasibility studies, USACE Sa-vannah District, Chief of the Planning Divi-

sion, Bill Bailey indicated, “We don’t believethe harbor deepening will cause any addi-tional land-side improvements to beneeded.”

As for the approximately $306 millionto be spent on mitigation and evaluation, thefollowing are all included in the projectscope: construction of a new fish bypassaround New Savannah Bluff Lock and Damin Augusta; acquisition and preservation of2,245 acres of wetlands; installation of anoxygen injection system to compensate forpotentially lower levels of dissolved oxygenin the water; construction of a raw waterstorage impoundment for the city of Savan-nah’s industrial and domestic water treat-ment facilities; recovery, documentation, andcurate of the Civil War ironclad CSS Geor-gia; as well as environmental monitoring be-ginning prior to construction and ending tenyears after construction to determine the ex-tent of effects from the project.

The extensive studies provide both theCorps and the public with a high degree ofconfidence in the findings to manage the im-pacts and find solutions for the challenges.The actual deepening will be accomplishedthrough a combination of hopper dredgingand cutter-head dredging methods, withdredge material deposition in both EPA-ap-proved ocean-dredged material disposal sitesand existing and approved land-side con-fined disposal facilities.

The SHEP is expected to provide greatbenefits to the nation and to the states ofGeorgia and South Carolina. The Port of Sa-vannah, including Garden City Terminaland Ocean Terminal, serves up to 44 percentof the US population. Access for exportationof goods grown or made in the Southeast isexpected to improve and benefit the regionaleconomy. A study has shown that the state’sdeepwater ports already support 352,146jobs throughout Georgia. On top of thesebenefits, the port already brings in $1.4 bil-lion in state taxes and $4.5 billion in federaltaxes. As imports and exports increase, thesenumbers are expected to continue to grow.v

11DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

What is going on with the Georgia Engineering Alliance?The Georgia Engineering Alliance (GEA) isreorganizing into a collaborative coalition ofprofessional societies and related industry or-ganizations to serve the broad needs of theGeorgia Engineering Community. This neworganization will seek members to facilitate agrowing spectrum of activities (e.g. legisla-tive advocacy, social, education, and bestpractices).

For the last eleven years, the membersof GEA and, by extension, the engineeringprofession and general public have benefitedfrom coordinated legislative advocacy, cen-tralized staff support, and other events, suchas the GEA Leadership Council. In the fu-ture, the members of the GEA coalition planto have a broader membership to expandsuch collaboration and advocacy.

Where we are now:GEA has reached a milestone as it makes thetransition from an organization with a pro-fessional staff and a large budget, to a volun-teer driven coalition. Up until July 1, 2012,GEA provided primary administrative sup-port for ACEC, GSPE, and other servicessuch as Web sites and event registration for ahost of other organizations such as ASCE.Since July 1, the board has worked carefullywith GSPE, ACEC, The Georgia Engineermagazine, and affiliate members to close outthe current GEA activities and to provide afund for continued operations. In this tran-sition period, the board of GEA has alsoworked with member organizations to ensurethat primary outreach activities of GEA con-tinue for 2012 and 2013.

For the last few years, the four ongoingmajor annual activities of GEA have been:• Legislative Coalition• The Georgia Engineer Magazine• E-Week: Banquet, Awards, Future

Cities, Mathcounts, etc.• Summer Conference

Next steps for GEA:The bylaws of the GEA have been revisedand adopted by the current board. The cur-rent board of directors (five members) hasreached out to all ten current GEA associa-tions to ask these organizations to join theexpanded coalition. This will create a newboard, with each association having one voteand one board member. It is the desire of thenewly formed GEA coalition to includemany more of Georgia’s thirty four (34) en-gineering organizations to join the board asmembers.

During the first part of 2013 the newlyexpanded board will further refine the mis-sion of the newly formed coalition and de-velop a plan for funding ongoing activities.One of the challenges for GEA is to decideon what will be the best role for it to play, ei-ther as a sponsoring organization (as it hasdone in the past) or as a facilitator of mem-ber activities. At this time, GEA, for FY2012/2013, is acting as a facilitator on EWeek (GSPE is primary member sponsor)and Summer Conference (ACEC/G is pri-mary member sponsor). To provide conti-nuity during 2013, ACEC/G will invoicemember organizations for the magazine re-lated expenses in place of GEA.

The details of how GEA will functionare yet to be finalized. The following is abrief summary of the views and aspirationsexpressed by the current GEA board:• The governance of the reorganized GEA

will be by the Leadership Council (serv-ing as the board of directors). It is an-ticipated there will be an executivecommittee, elected by the members.

• Governance should be by representativecross section of the membership. Forexample, the executive board might beconfigured to include representativesfrom at least four of the members.

• It is desired that the new members ofGEA will include all previous members

and that the organization will activelyseek to include other participants.

An emerging theme of GEA could be sum-marized by saying that its members seek col-laborative advocacy first and foremost. Ifthis goal is pursued, the interests of its mem-bers are well served.

What is the long-term value propositionof GEA to the engineers of Georgia?Over the last six months I have asked GEAmembers about the value of GEA. Two con-sistent comments have been:• Legislative Advocacy: For years there

have been extensive conversations abouthow to collect the political influence ofGeorgia’s engineering community. Acommon theme expressed by GEAmembers is that it is important to builda coalition that allows the engineers ofthe state to speak with one voice.

• Best Practices: Sharing informationand insight on best practices in the var-ious GEA organizations is an obviousbenefit of the newly formed coalition.

GEA has an imperative to help engineersadapt to the changing roles we are asked toplay. In the future, GEA will serve as facil-itator as our professional associations addressthe ‘new normal’ for our engineering prac-tices and businesses. There are many chal-lenges ahead for the engineers of this state. Please support GEA as it is restructured tobetter serve the engineers of Georgia.v

The Newly Reorganized Georgia Engineering Alliance:Collaborative Advocacy

By Charles McMillan, PE, LEED AP | GEA Board Member

The current members of the Georgia Engineering Alliance (GEA) for 2012 are as follows: GSPE, ASCE, ASHE, SEAOG, ITE, GEF,WTS, ITS, and ACEC.

12 The GeorGia enGineer

HILLTunnel

the last link from Georgiato the West

13DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

By Thomas C. Leslie | Georgia Engineering Alliance | Director of External Affairs

o the role of railroads in developing inland Georgia in its early years isoft told. In 1833, business leaders in both Augusta and Savannah or-ganized railroad companies that would build lines into the interior. It

was here that timber was being cut and cotton grown, and each commodity neededaccess to markets. The port at the city of Savannah and the barge trade from Au-gusta downstream on the Savannah River provided such access.

In 1836, railroad advocates met at a General Railroad Convention in Knoxvilleto consider an ‘extension’ from Georgia westward to a proposed Cincinnati-Louisville-Knoxville line. By the end of 1836, the Georgia General Assembly agreedto the plan and authorized a detailed survey of the route from Chattanooga to apoint southeast of the Chattahoochee River. The survey was completed in 1837.The estimated cost of construction was $2,129,920.08. (Who would carry such acost estimate to nine significant figures?) The southern terminus of the state routewas set as the point to which the lines from Savannah and Augusta would convergein what is now downtown Atlanta.

Construction of the state route, the Western & Atlantic, was begun in 1838.By 1845, the Georgia Railroad from Augusta was completed to Atlanta, and theWestern & Atlantic was operating to Marietta. The Central of Georgia Railroadfrom Savannah reached Atlanta in1846.

S

Thomas C. Leslie

14 The GeorGia enGineer

The W&A was described in 1860 bythe line’s Superintendent as “the crookedestroad under the sun.” It went around moun-tains and crossed streams at elevations thatkept grades at no more than 30 feet/mile andcurves with a radius of 1,000 feet or more.In northwest Georgia, the ridges run NE toSW with deep valleys between, but theW&A runs on a NW-SE line. This makes ithard to find a route around a ridge. Instead,the route seeks a gap through the ridge thatallows passage at an acceptable grade.Chetoogeta Mountain, halfway betweenDalton and Ringgold and west of I-75, wasthe one ridge where a gap could not be foundand that could not be out flanked. A tunnelseemed to be the only way forward.

At the end of 1837, plans were made forgrading and bridging streams for the first 50miles of the 138-mile state route, and inApril 1838 contracts were let for construc-tion; by October 1838, contracts were let forthe next 50 miles. It was not until late-1839that a final contract was let for constructionof the final segment of the line into Chat-tanooga, with the exception of the tunnelthrough Chetoogeta Mountain.

Then the unexpected finally caught upwith the project. A national financial panic

in 1837 finally resulted in a severe recessionthat, by 1839, led to the collapse of cottonprices, the withdrawal of credit, and the in-ability of the state of Georgia to sell bondsto fund the W&A Railroad. One of theW&A’s commissioners traveled to New Yorkand then on to London in an attempt to sellstate bonds—there were no takers.

Contractors were offered state script—in essence, loans by the contractors to the

state to continue work. During this eco-nomic drought, it was reported that statebonds and script sold for as low at 48 centson the dollar. While work continued, it wasconsiderably slowed. The Georgia GeneralAssembly set as its top priority the comple-tion of the first 50 miles of the line—whichwas under construction from 1843 to 1845,including grading, stream/river crossings,and laying track.

15DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

As part of the original agreementsreached at the 1836 Knoxville convention,Georgia and Tennessee committed to con-nect the W&A line to the Nashville &Chattanooga Railroad (N&C RR) at Chat-tanooga. The original date for Georgia toreach Chattanooga was 1848, but it wasdelayed by economic conditions. On Oc-tober 18, 1847, the Tennessee General As-sembly approved an Act “giving furthertime for completion of the W&A Railroadof Georgia to” reach Chattanooga. It pro-vided two more years and set January 1,1850, as the new date.

In order to meet this deadline, theW&A concluded that they would build theline north of Tunnel Hill to connect with theN&C RR and would build the tunnel as thelast element of the line. This led to a six-month period where trains arriving at TunnelHill transferred all passengers and freight tomule-drawn wagons that traversedChetoogeta Mountain to link the two railsegments. With this delay and added ex-pense, the East Tennessee and Georgia Rail-road began assisting the W&A in layingtrack on the graded roadbed to expeditecompletion.

By 1848, construction of the actual tun-nel began, and in October 1849, the firstbore was punched through. It was reportedthat the teams from both sides of the tunnelwere within 1/16 of an inch of the correctalignment. Using mostly Irish immigrantworkers, the tunnel was carved from themountain by driving steel rods into the faceof the tunnel with sledgehammers. Theholes were filled with black powder and det-onated to break loose the rock. And the samewas repeated for almost a year. The tunnel isan arch about 18 feet high and 12.5 feetwide. Three-foot thick, limestone walls wereconstructed to about five feet in height. Ontop of these walls, a two-foot thick brick archwas constructed. Bricks were made nearbywith slave labor. The tunnel is 1,477 feetlong. By 1850, the tunnel was completed,and track was laid as the final link betweenAtlanta and Chattanooga. In Tunnel Hillthere was much celebration when the firsttrain passed through in May 1850. It wasthe first railroad tunnel in the entire south.The line was the final link to connect the At-

16 The GeorGia enGineer

lantic Ocean (at Savannah) to the ‘West’(meaning the Mississippi River Valley via theTennessee River).

The economic panic of 1837 and thesubsequent recession that lasted until themid-1840s seem to have dulled the luster ofthe entire project. Furthermore, during itsinitial year of two of operation, it becameclear that corners had been cut to save money(corruption and mismanagement was tocome later during Reconstruction). Most ofthe rails were not the conventional ‘T’ railsof today but were described as flimsy. Therolling stock was described as insubstantial.It was not until 1853 that a new superin-tendent was able to correct many of the de-fects in the line and its operation.

During the entire period of major con-struction from 1839 to 1850, there was a ro-bust debate throughout Georgia overwhether to abandon the entire State Line en-terprise. Supporters included most electedofficials, commercial towns along the route,and cotton producers. The oppositionwanted to cut the state’s losses and simplyabandon the project or sell it. The naysayerscontended that connecting to the ‘West’would bring more competition (e.g., Mid-west-grown corn) and have a devastating ef-fect on Georgia. Some even expressed their

contentment with an isolated status quo. In1843, the Georgia General Assembly ap-proved an Act that authorized the Governorto sell the entire W&A ‘as it stood’ if hecould get $1 million for it. The Act extendedthis offer for seven years—no offers were re-ceived.

By 1928, the tunnel had become toosmall for the much larger modern locomo-tives. A new tunnel was constructed parallelto the old and only 75 feet to the north. Itwas just too complicated and unsafe to ex-pand the old one. The old tunnel had a use-ful life of 78 years—as a railroad. It waslargely abandoned and forgotten for manyyears. In 1992, the tunnel was deeded to thecity of Tunnel Hill, and in 1998, the city gota TEA Grant from DOT to help withrestoration. ARCADIS was hired to designrestoration, and Edwin Brady ConstructionCompany completed the work. The West-ern & Atlantic Railroad Tunnel and Museumnow operates tours of the restored tunnel ona daily basis.

There is a certain sameness to the sto-ries about ‘breakthrough’ infrastructure. Itwas the first railroad tunnel in the old South,and the State Line was the first to move be-yond the Appalachian Mountains. Althoughthere are many unique features in the history

of the W&A, there are other attributes incommon with many big public works:• Over budget: the 1837 cost estimate

was $2,129,920.08. The final con-struction cost for work during the pe-riod 1838-1850 was $4,087,925.

• Behind schedule: Before the 1837 eco-nomic panic, there was hope that theentire line would be completed by themid-1840s; it was not opened until1850 and was not fully evolved until1853.

• Politics: The W&A was a product ofmulti-state collaboration and politicaland business leadership. At the sametime, there was an almost continuouspolitical debate within Georgia onwhether to abandon (and later, whetherto sell) the project or not.

• Enduring value: In spite of all theabove, the State Line is still extraordi-narily valuable. Even after 162 years ofuse, it is leased by the state to CSX andis heavily used to move freight effi-ciently. The old tunnel is also in usetoday—as a tourist attraction and his-tory museum. v

17DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

18 The GeorGia enGineer

he Georgia TaxpayerFalse Claims Act, Geor-gia Code Sections 23-3-120 – 127, took effect inJuly of 2012. The initialreaction of architects

and engineers doing business with state andlocal governmental authorities is likely a‘what, me worry?’ approach, thinking thatthis law is directed at contractors and sub-contractors. However, such a narrow anderroneous assumption is made at the perilof unwary design professionals dealing inthe public works arena.

The Georgia statute is substantiallymodeled after this federal False Claims Act.It is difficult to advocate against such a broadbased law intended to reduce and sanctionfraudulent behavior and false claims in thepublic contracting arena. However, the man-ner in which this sweeping new law can beemployed and the expansive nature of the in-vestigative tools made available to govern-ment officials give rise to potential concernsfor those potentially affected by it. Decadesof experience in application of the federalFalse Claims Act are instructive in determin-ing the potential application to participantsin the construction industry. Moreover, thepotential for abusive application is increasedby the extension of this state law to localpublic works and enforcement, upon ‘dele-gation’ by the Attorney General, by local dis-trict attorneys, prosecutors or other“appropriate officials of a local government.”

Previously, no such statutory rights orremedies existed in Georgia regarding claimsmade in the context of design and construc-tion contracting on publicly funded state orlocal projects. Under this Act, the conceptof ‘false’ or fraudulent claims is now ex-panded to encompass claims of all kinds anddescriptions made in connection with activ-ities funded by Georgia state and local gov-ernmental agencies, including clearly claimsarising in public works construction projects.The most immediate consequence of this Act

will be exposure to imposition of sanctionsupon a person found to have submitted sucha ‘false claim.’ The Act allows imposition ofcivil penalties (“not less than $5,500.00 andnot more than $11,000.00 for each false orfraudulent claim”) and actual damages (witha multiplier trebling the total) on thoseknowingly submitting, or even aiding in thesubmission of, such a false or fraudulentclaim. Additionally, the violator “shall alsobe liable to the state or local government forall costs, reasonable expenses and reasonableattorney’s fees” incurred by the state or localgovernment.

The Georgia Act opens the door to pur-suit of sanctions not only by the state au-thorities, but also by local governmentalofficials against parties thought to have sub-mitted false or fraudulent claims in connec-tion with provision of work or services onlocal public projects. The Act also permitscivil enforcement actions to be brought byprivate persons in which the State or localgovernment may elect to intervene. Such en-forcement actions may be initiated by formeremployees or other insiders with specificknowledge about alleged wrongdoing sup-porting an assertion that a claim was ‘false.’The private plaintiff is not only given‘whistleblower’ type protection from retalia-tion, but also the additional incentive ofsharing in up to 30 percent of the amountrecovered in the resolution or settlement ofthe action it initiated, plus attorney’s fees, ex-penses, and costs of litigation. Finally, Geor-gia, for the first time, has adopted theinvestigative device known as a “civil inves-tigative demand” (“CID”) which can be verybroadly employed, even against persons orentities not actually targeted by the investi-gation and before any actual civil action iscommenced under the False Claims Act.CIDs can seek extensive discovery and dis-closures from any person or entity believedto be “in possession, custody, or control ofany documentary material or informationrelevant to a false claims law investigation,”

all without the involvement, participation oreven knowledge, of the target of the investi-gation itself.

Under the Georgia Act, a ‘claim’ is de-fined as “any request or demand, whetherunder a contract or otherwise, for money . .. that is (a) Presented to an officer, employee,or agent of the state or local government or(b) Made to a contractor, grantee or other re-cipient, if the money or property is to bespent or used on the state’s or local govern-ment’s behalf or to advance a state or localgovernment program or interest.” Such sanc-tions and penalties can be assessed on “anyperson, firm, corporation, or other legal en-tity that:• Knowingly presents or causes to be pre-

sented a false or fraudulent claim forpayment or approval;

• Knowingly makes, uses, or causes to bemade or used a false record or statementmaterial to a false or fraudulent claim;

• Knowingly makes, uses, or causes to bemade or used a false record or statementmaterial to an obligation to pay or trans-mit money . . . or knowingly conceals,knowingly and improperly avoids, ordecreases an obligation to pay or trans-mit money or property to the state or alocal government.

A person is considered to have acted ‘know-ingly’ where such person (a) has actualknowledge of the information, (b) acts in de-liberate ignorance of the truth or falsity ofthe information, or (c) acts in reckless disre-gard of the truth or falsity of the informa-tion. No proof of specific intent to defraudis required, since a person is considered‘knowledgeable’ even without actual knowl-edge of the falsity where acting with “delib-erate indifference” or “reckless disregard” ofthe truth or falsity of the information sub-mitted.

From this definition, and by reference

Georgia’s New “False Claims Act” New risks and burdens of state and local public works contracting

By David R. Hendrick, Esq. | General Counsel | Hendrick, Phillips, Salzman & Flatt, P.C.

T

19DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

to the analogous federal statutory languageand its application, it is apparent that such aclaim would likely include requests, submis-sions or representations typically made in aconstruction project context. While such‘claim’ activities are generally more prevalenton the construction contractor/subcontrac-tor side of the industry, those providing pro-fessional services under contract with state orlocal governmental agencies, including de-sign professionals such as architects and en-gineers, can be swept up within the reach ofthe Act as well. For example, such ‘false’ or‘fraudulent’ claim charges may arise out ofsuch typical submissions, representations,certifications or attestations routinely madeby architects and engineers on public worksprojects as:• Those given under the newly enacted

statutory requirement that those con-tracting with public agencies for per-formance of construction-relatedservices, including design services, mustregister and participate in the federalwork authorization plan (the E-Verifyprogram) and submit a signed, nota-rized affidavit attesting to such compli-ance (see O.C.G.A. 13-10-91);

• certifications of code compliance ofdesign elements;

• certification or submission of results ofinvestigative and testing activities;

• certification of payment on contractorapplications for payment;

• certification of substantial completion;

• certification dealing withDBE/MBE/WBE program compli-ance;

In addition, there is the submission of theirown applications or invoices for payment forservices rendered.

Moreover, this exposure applies not onlyto a party contracting directly with the gov-ernmental entity, but also to the subconsul-tants initiating any such submissions orrequests. This will apply to all such con-struction projects undertaken or funded bythe state or any of is departments, boards,bureaus, divisions, public authorities com-missions “or other governmental entity per-forming a governmental function for thisstate,” as well as by ‘local governments’ whichis very broadly defined to include any Geor-gia county, municipal corporation, consoli-dated government, authority, board ofeducation or other local public board, body,or commission, town, school district, hospi-tal authority, or other political subdivision ofthe state or of such local government, in-cluding MARTA.

All participants in the public side of theconstruction industry are well advised to take

a long and careful look at the potential ap-plication of this new False Claims Act totheir activities. This law could have far reach-ing effect on participants in public sectorconstruction projects with the risk of poten-tial imposition of such civil penalties for par-ties that ‘knowingly’ submit ‘false claims’ onsuch public works projects, or even publi-cally funded projects. There is now a steepdownside if such a false claim is presented,regardless of existence of an actual intent todefraud. v

20 The GeorGia enGineer

21DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

22 The GeorGia enGineer

Brian Kemp was appointed Secretaryof State by Governor Sonny Perduein January 2010 and was elected toa full four year term in November of2010. Prior to that, Kemp served two termsin the Georgia State Senate, leading effortsto cut wasteful spending, streamline govern-ment, cut red tape, and support small busi-ness growth, all initiatives he has continuedto champion as Secretary of State. Profes-sionally, Secretary Kemp has started numer-ous business interests and is the owner ofKemp Properties, a small business specializ-ing in real estate development, investment,and property management.

Secretary Kemp is a lifelong resident ofAthens, is a graduate of Clarke Central HighSchool and of the University of Georgia,where he earned a Bachelor of Science degreein Agriculture.

On October 24th, ACEC/G ExecutiveDirector Michael Sullivan sat down withSecretary Kemp to discuss his legislativeagenda and what’s ahead.

Obviously, big on your agenda dur-ing the 2012 legislative session was the pro-fessional licensing reform legislation. Couldyou outline what was the driving force be-hind that bill?

Well, you are seeing this year it’s allreally budget driven. Our agency continuesto get less money to operate and more workto do. We are just really on an unsustainablepath. You know, I said that last year and Ithink now, when we had to come out andclose the Archives to the public, I think nowthey are seeing the budget shape that we arein. We are just in a really tough budgetarysituation and I think our Licensing Divisionis a prime example. The Licensing Divisionbudget has been decreased by 17 percent.That’s the least of any part of our agency be-cause it’s my number one priority, obviously,is getting people in the workforce. Unfortu-nately, we have had to decrease our head-

count in the Licensing Division by almost 32percent and we continue to see increasedworkloads. The General Assembly continuesto give us new licenses to administer, such asthe pharmacy techs two years ago and musictherapists last year, while cutting our budgetwhen we already have difficulty servicing theprofessions we were already licensing. Withthe immigration reform bill, we are now hav-ing to check ‘secure and verifiable” on thedocuments on all new applications and re-newals every time we issue one. That hasbeen a huge amount of work for us, not onlyhaving to verify the secure and verifiable doc-ument but we now have 25 percent of thepeople who call the licensing division hangup before talking to someone in the officebecause they are on hold so long. A lot ofthat is because of secure and verifiable docu-ments. So, we cannot continue on the pathwe are on. We’ve either got to get more re-sources or we have to figure out ways to con-tinue to get more efficient with the limitedresources we have. That’s why we introducedthe licensing bill last year and that’s why wehave been working on the compromise ver-sion of the legislation this year.

I know that you have been reaching outand talking with some of the groups that hadconcerns with the previous version of the li-censing reform bill. How will the new ver-

sion of the bill be different as a result of thoseconversations dialog?

The biggest thing that people had aproblem with last year was the creation ofthe seven member consumer board thatwould handle rules and regulations and alsoserve as the hearings board. So, in the com-promise legislation, we have taken all of thatout. We have done away with the sevenmember board concept completely. We aregoing to leave rule and regulation makingwith the existing licensing boards, and theywill also continue to be the final stop for thehearings process. The licensing and enforce-ment side will move to the Secretary ofState’s Office, which was in the legislationlast year. That will allow us to streamline thewhole licensing process and the enforcementprocess. These are the two biggest complaintsI get from people, that it takes too long toget people licensed and into the workforce,and that we are not doing enough to go afterthose that are competing against people thatare doing things the right way. It will be apriority in my office to do the enforcementpart of it.

As far as the hearings board, you reallycan’t have a member of the hearings board bea cognizant and be in the final hearingsprocess, because that really violates dueprocess, as you well know. So we are goingto have the boards themselves appoint at leastten cognizants from their industry for peerreview who will not be members of the boardand who we could rely on to work with aswe do investigations or other licensing issuesthat we may have to deal with. None of thisis going to change scope of practice, rulesand regs; it’s just changing the way theprocess works.

Some of the professions I have talkedwith tell me they like that because now youhave a cognizant or cognizants that are onthe board that make a recommendation, andyour only appeal is to the full board. So thepeople who made the recommendation youare appealing are sitting on the board you areappealing that decision to. It’s not really a

Q & A with Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp

true appeal and some people feel like it’s astacked deck against them rather than truedue process. Under the new system, you aregoing to be dealing with cognizants that areseparate from the board, and if you disagreewith their recommendation or what our of-fice says, you can have a true, fresh new hear-ing in front of a board that has never heardthis case before, and they will hear both sidesof it and make the decision. So a lot of theprofessional association people I have talkedto really like that for their members and feellike that will be a fairer due process.

Most of these things are black andwhite, and we have to license everyone withvery limited resources to do that. What weare trying to do is on these simplified appli-cations where it’s black and white, is to gothrough and verify that they meet the edu-cational requirements, made their payment,passed their test, and completed whatever ap-

prenticeship or clinical hours that are re-quired, and so on. Once all of that has beenverified as being met, we would go ahead andlicense that person. But if we get to a grayarea, where we are not certain that the re-quirements have been met, then we can thengo to a cognizant and have them look at it tohelp us decide should we license this personor not. If we decide not to license that per-son, then they could appeal that decision byasking for a hearing and going before the li-censing board for that profession. So, theboard would have the final say in those typesof situations.

Same thing on the enforcement side.What we are trying to do is set up grids forthe ‘normal’ types of violations that occur reg-ularly, for example, if somebody forgets torenew their license or something similar. Forexample, in barbershops one that comes upoften is they don’t keep the combs in Barbi-

cide. We don’t need to go to the board onthose types of things. We have set fines forthat. Everyone knows what those are, and wejust go ahead and do those administrativelyin our office. Ninety-five percent of the peo-ple in those types of situations just want toadmit guilt, pay their fine, and move on. Butfor these other more complex cases, where wewould be out of our level of expertise, we canrely on a cognizant who is an expert in thatfield. If we have an enforcement action wherewe are going to revoke or suspend somebody’slicense and that person is OK with that ac-tion and they sign it, then that case is closedand we move on. If they disagree, they can re-quest a hearing before the board.

Your office continues to see a shrinkingbudget, yet the licensing side of your officegenerates significant revenue. What’s thebreakdown on that?

23DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

24 The GeorGia enGineer

The licensees are paying about $24 mil-lion to our office each year in licensing fees,and those funds go straight into the State’sGeneral Fund, as you well know. In return,our office is being appropriated about $6.8million. So, there are millions of dollars oflicensees’ money that should be used to sup-port the work we do in licensing but insteadthose dollars are being sent somewhere elseto pay for other things in state government.I’ve been telling the legislature and OPB [theGovernor’s Office of Planning & Budget –Ed.] about this for two years, and that weneed more money and more people. I’ve al-ready thrown out their idea of closing the

State Archives to the public as a way of sav-ing money. If it gets much worse, we mayhave to close the Tifton office and lay offsome call center workers, investigators, andapplication processors. Obviously, thosekinds of cuts are going to negatively impactour service delivery. In the last year, our li-censing times for all the professions havegone from an average of about 60 days up to70 days. And our renewals that used to be astreamlined electronic process that you didon the Internet and took at most two days, isnow averaging ten days. Last year, we had8,000 people that didn’t send their secureand verifiable document for verifying immi-

gration status. Now, we license about a halfa million people, so 8,000 is not such a bignumber. But when you think about havingto write or call or e-mail 8,000 people backto let them know why we can’t completetheir renewal, that’s created a helluva lot ofwork for us. And we get no additionalmoney or people to do that. The immigra-tion reform bill has taken a streamlinedprocess and made it bureaucratic, exactly theopposite of what you would want to bedoing in this kind of economy.

What are some possible fixes?

25DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

The way the law reads now, every timethe ‘public benefit’ is issued (for example, alicense renewal), we have to check the secureand verifiable document. We are going to beasking the General Assembly to modify thelaw so that we only have to verify citizenshipand immigration status one time, rather thanhaving to verify it every time we renew thesame person’s license. If we can get the lawchanged, then it will continue to be a bearfor another year, but once we cycle everyonethrough, we should be able to streamline re-newals again.

What do you think the chances are ofpassing a bill that addresses some of the im-pacts from the immigration reform bill in theupcoming legislative session?

I think they will be good. Numberone, people are more enlightened to the po-sition we are in our office now. Number two,I have spoken with the Governor about this,and we are either going to be in our ownstand-alone bill or we are going to be in a billthat fixes some of the unintended conse-quences of the immigration reforms andthat’s it. I am not going to get caught up inthese political games about other issues. Thishas nothing to do with being soft on illegalimmigration. This is about helping smallbusiness owners and working Georgians andputting people back to work. This shouldn’tbe controversial, and it ought to have bipar-tisan support. And if anybody monkeys withit, I am going to call them out and tell themthat they are hurting working Georgians ifthey try to put something controversial inthe bill.

Is there anything else you would like toadd?

Back to the licensing reform bill, noth-ing in that bill should change scope of prac-tice or current rules and regs or educationalrequirements. Our intention is not to changeany of that. We are only trying to change theprocess. If there are other ways to do that thatpeople want to offer up, we are more thanwilling to listen. I think the concessions wehave made in the new version make it prettyclear we are listening to folks’ concerns. v

Solving Subsurface

Problems Since 1981

• Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE)

• Underground utility locating

• Subsurface mapping and profiling

• Concrete imaging and inspection

• Geophysical exploration

• 3D subsurface imaging

• Geophysical borehole logging

GA: 770-980-1002 SC: 843-769-7379

NC: 919-406-1808 www.gel.com

See daily videos on:thegeorgiaengineer.com

26 The GeorGia enGineer

he ACEC gets a lot ofthings right, and the 2012

Transportation Summit wasanother example. At a sold-out

function on November 29th atthe Infomart, over 400 professionals wereprovided a full day of insightful informationabout the transportation opportunities andchallenges on the local, statewide, and fed-eral levels.

The opening remarks were delivered byARC Executive Director Doug Hooker. Mr.Hooker framed his comments in the contextof the progress the region continues to makein the transportation arena as well as the otherareas impacting the Atlanta metropolitan re-gion: population growth, water and sewer; airquality, aging population, etc. A primaryARC goal through the planning process is toachieve mobility, safety, and capacity acrossall transportation modes. Funding remains asignificant concern, and Mr. Hooker verbal-

ized the disappointment we all feelabout the failed TIA vote. However,for Mr. Hooker the silver lining isthat the region worked collabora-tively across numerous politicalboundaries. The new normal/neweconomy is regional. Regions makeup 35 percent of the land area but provide 65percent of the economic activity. Mr. Hookersummarized his closing remarks with theguiding principle of ‘innovate locally and ex-port globally.’

Presenting advancements being madestatewide, Toby Carr, the recently appointedDirector of Planning, shared information onGeorgia Department of Transportation(GDOT) initiatives. Although primarily fo-cusing on the highways’ current and plannedprograms, Mr. Carr also touched on progressthe State is making with regards to the othermajor economic impacting modes: the portsof Savannah and Brunswick, Hartsfield-Jack-

son Airport, and the railroad network. TheState is preparing strategies to maximize thefunding to be available through the recentlylegislated federal appropriations bill: MovingAhead to Progress (MAP-21). While alsolamenting about the outcome of the TIAvote, Mr. Carr shared his excitement for thethree regions that did pass the sales tax andGDOT’s efforts for successfully implement-ing the projects within those regions.

The difficulty of shrinking resourcesand escalating costs affects all levels of gov-ernment. Decreasing vehicle miles of travel,more fuel efficient vehicles, and lack of a fueltax increases are primary reasons for the

Ashford Dunwoody Road Diverging Diamond Interchange

Daniel B. Dobry, Jr., P.E., PTOE | Croy Engineering, LLC

Recap of the

2012Transportation

Summit

BY

T

27DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

Highway Trust Funds difficulties. And eventhough a six year federal appropriations billwould have been preferable, MAP-21 doesmaintain and then experience moderatefunding increases over the next two years.Matt Reiffer, the national ACEC Trans-portation Director, spoke of the transporta-tion industry’s three-year effort lobbying ofCongress to arrive at MAP-21; and theirwork has already begun to prepare for thenext federal appropriations bill. AlthoughMr. Reiffer’s comment that “The future isbleak” generated some moaning from the au-dience, he was upbeat about the continuingefforts to educate law makers about how crit-ical the nations’ infrastructure is, particularlytransportation, and that programs that areessential to the nation’s economical growthmust be protected. Another important effortMr. Reiffer shared was the transportation or-ganizations’ continuing efforts to assist in de-veloping a long-term revenue solution for theHighway Trust Fund.

Polling is an inexact science. The victoryof the TIA vote was never assured but thepercentage of the ‘no’ votes was not expected.Understanding the viewpoints and perspec-tives of the general public aids in developingpolicies that will generate support for theirimplementation. Pete Rahn of HNTB, whoholds the distinction of having been the headof two different state DOTs, shared the re-sults of his firm’s national polling effort re-garding transportation. Although resultsfrom a number of questions were presented(To name a few: state of the existing infrastruc-ture; reasons to support implementing tolls; andwho should be trusted in making transporta-tion investment decisions), one of the primaryperspectives is that a majority of Americansdon’t believe what is currently being pro-posed will solve the nation’s transportationproblems. Mr. Rahn urged the audience thatwe need to put significant effort into findingreal long-term solutions that also pass the testof urgency.

Continuing the format established a fewyears ago, the luncheon speaker, Russell Mc-Murry, the recently appointed GDOT ChiefEngineer, gave his remarks and then pre-sented the GPTQ Preconstruction Awards(the top project being the diverging diamondinterchange at I-285 and Ashford Dunwoody

Road). Mr. McMurry’s speech centered onthe number of innovative programs GDOThas and will be undertaking. The list includesbut is not limited to:• Shoulder use on GA 400• Variable speed limits on I-285• Roundabouts (their numbers are increasing)• Complete Street Policy

Mr. McMurry also discussed new waysGDOT is tackling their multi-modal pro-grams, touched on revised scheduling that isaggressive but reasonable, and included re-marks on environmental streamlining whichwill impact the Environmental Services Of-fice. The recurring theme that Mr. McMurrybrought out is that as the public sees the pos-itive results of these programs, the publicconfidence in GDOT will increase.

Following lunch, three different sessions,each with three tracks, were available to ob-tain specific information on proposed policyand program changes and the status of cur-rent projects. Depending on the participant’s

interest, one could sit in on an update to theAtlanta Streetcar, the Multimodal PassengerTerminal, a summary of the new Section 4(f )policy, Value Engineering trends, and anoverview of GDOT’s Design Build activities.The problem I experienced with this year’sbreakout sessions was picking which ones tosit in on at the exclusion of others.

Even with the problems of funding andthe misperception of the general publicabout the challenges those in charge have indelivering capacity, while adding safety-en-hancing and economy-stimulating projects,it is a very exciting time to be a transporta-tion professional. This year’s TransportationSummit provided us the opportunity to hearfrom the front line folks on all levels, inter-act with our peers, and motivate us to con-tinue working on providing thetransportation network that provides thenecessary mobility, safety, and capacity forthis country to compete on a global levelwhile satisfying local transportation de-mands. v

Gainesville City View Center Pedestrian Bridge

I Best Bridge/Structural DesignMoreland Altobelli AssociatesThe City of Gainesville and theGainesville Redevelopment Authorityhired Moreland Altobelli to provide engi-neering services for a new pedestrianbridge to complement the existing mid-town area and the planned commercial de-velopment on Jesse Jewell Parkway. Publicinput was actively solicited and addressedthe facility’s aesthetics and functionality.

Arched precast beams were selected toaddress the limited clearance. The mid-span beam top and bottom are concentriccircles. Because of the arched geometry, thedesign was completed using MicroStationand a variety of software to ensure ade-quate beam strength and compliance withAASHTO stress limits. Diaphragms were

used under the walking surface of thebridge at ten-foot spacings. Couplers were

set in the precast beams to connect withthe deck reinforcement and various tech-niques were used to tie the beams to theabutments and intermediate bents. In ad-dition to the special design beams, curvingarchitectural fences lend an open feelingfor pedestrians walking on the bridge, andalso to motorists on the parkway below.

The Gainesville community considersthis bridge as the cornerstone of its mid-town redevelopment. The total projectbudget was $3 million, including designand construction. This project came inunder budget at $2.4 million.

II Best Rural Design ProjectParsons Transportation GroupUS 19/ State Route 3 is located in SumterCounty. The purpose of this project was to

improve this six-mile corridor from Ameri-cus to Smithville by widening the roadfrom one lane in each direction to twolanes in each direction, including a grassedmedian separation, and improving theshoulders along the road. In addition, theproject would replace a structurally defi-cient bridge over the CSX railroad andwiden another bridge over the MuckaleeCreek.

GDOT retained Parsons for servicesincluding geometric roadway design, ero-sion control and drainage design andstructural designs for the replacement andwidened bridges. The majority of the cor-

ridor is in a rural area with narrow, un-paved shoulders, but the northern end ismore urban, including sidewalks on bothsides.

Challenges included the location ofseveral crossroads, homes, businesses, andagricultural and historic properties. At the

northern end of the project, realignmentsfor perpendicular intersections were neededto improve safety and turn movements.The two bridges posed their own chal-lenges: Extensive coordination with CSXwas needed to ensure minimal disruptionto railroad operations during the bridge re-placement, and careful mitigation wasneeded during widening the other bridge,which was located over a flowing creek.

The increased capacity for thiswidened and improved roadway affordscommunities from Americus to Smithvillea better access route and will encourage fu-ture growth and development in the area.

28 The GeorGia enGineer

TThhee GGPPTTQQ AAwwAArrddss

MorelandAltobelli

Grand DesignWinner

Moreland Altobelli was chosen by ourteam of judges from among all of thewinning projects—it earned the highestscores for overall project quality. TheAshford Dunwoody DDI Project scoredhigh for its: • innovation, • cost-effectiveness, • sustainability, • pedestrian access and • effective public participation.

29DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

n the occasion of the 2012 Georgia’s Transporta-tion Summit, on November 29th, at Americas-Mart, Georgia Department of Transportationalso awarded their annual GPTQ (GeorgiaPartnership for Transportation Quality) Awards.

Mr. Russell McMurray, Director, Division of Engi-neering made the presentations.

He stated that in the transportation industry, there is outstandingopportunity of partnering and cooperation. Especially in today’seconomy, partnering for cost-and time-efficiencies is a demonstrationof prudent customer service and taxpayer stewardship, and a way toencourage streamlining and innovation for quality project delivery.

These are the first awards issued under the new charter for theGeorgia Partnership for Transportation Quality which was signed bythe ACEC/GA, the Georgia Highway Contractors Association(GHCA), and the Georgia Department of Transportation.

This year’s GPTQ awards recognize projects of innovation andcomplexity, public involvement and context sensitive design.

OO

30 The GeorGia enGineer

The final project cost was $29.4 million,plus $750,000 for the bridge work.

III Best Complex Urban Design ProjectMcGee PartnersEagles Landing Parkway is a main corridorin Henry County, providing connectivitybetween I-75 and SR 155. The purpose ofthis project was to ease heavy traffic conges-tion in the fast-growing county. By widen-

ing the Parkway from two lanes to four, theproject would also improve pedestrian andmotorist safety and provide bike lanes ineach direction. Designed on a six-lane foot-print, the 44-foot depressed median couldbe used to accommodate another lane ineach direction in the future. The challengesincluded varying land-use areas nearby, in-cluding commercial/retail sites, single familyhomes, industrial warehouses, and PatesCreek and its associated wetlands.

McGee Partners designed the projectunder contract to Henry County. Eagle’sLanding Parkway corridor includes twobridges located approximately 0.5 milesapart. The first bridge is over the NorfolkSouthern Railroad. This bridge needed tonot only accommodate the roadway widen-ing, but also needed to be lengthened to ad-dress the railroad’s desire for an additionaltrack in the future. The second bridge isover Pates Creek and wetlands. Both bridgesconsist of a raised concrete median andspace to accommodate six lanes in the fu-ture. The two inner lanes are hatched, thusproviding four lanes on a six-lane structure.

The design and required right-of-wayfor the Eagle’s Landing Parkway wideningproject were funded by $7.6 million inHenry County SPLOST funds. The entire

cost of construction was covered by fundingreceived from the American Recovery andReinvestment Act (ARRA). The award, to-taling $22.3 million, was the second largestsingle award of stimulus dollars in metroAtlanta.

To qualify for the stimulus funds, theschedule for final plans completion was ac-celerated. The final field plan review wasrequested on March 9, 2009 and was heldjust over two weeks later on March 25.

The bid construction award was $22.3million and the project is expected to becompleted under budget, and Eagle’s Land-ing Parkway was open to traffic on April27, 2012, on-time.

IV Best Context Sensitive Design and PublicParticipation ProjectParsons BrinckerhoffThe Atlanta Street (State Route 9) corri-dor in Roswell has for decades needed im-provements. In 2011, after several studiesand designs that didn’t gain public sup-port, the City of Roswell again initiated aplanning and design project that wouldeliminate the three-lane reversible lane sys-tem along the corridor, and improve theintersection of SR 9 with RiversideRoad/Azalea Drive. This intersection hadthe highest intersection crash rate in theCity. The intersection improvement alsoincluded replacement of the structurallydeficient bridge on the approach overVickery Creek, and the whole projectwould address bike/ped connectivity, andprovide an aesthetically pleasing gatewayinto the city.

Given the history of the attempts tosolve the many issues along the corridor,

Parsons Brinkerhoff implemented an aggres-sive public involvement effort with forma-tion of a Citizens Advisory Group,Technical Advisory Group, focus groups,development of a Web page housed on theCity of Roswell Web site, household sur-veys, e-mail blasts, community briefings,and town hall meetings, in addition to thepublic meetings and public informationopen houses, with the goal of engaging di-verse stakeholders early and continuously,and gaining consensus from property andbusiness owners in the corridor. Among thekey partners was the National Park Service,and their guidance proved invaluable as po-tential environmental impacts arose.

There were many challenges to provid-ing all the desired transportation elementsin the SR 9 corridor, including Roswell’shistoric district, the Chattahoochee RiverNational Recreational Area, and limited ex-isting ROW. The narrow corridor requiredinnovative solutions to make all the ele-ments ‘fit.’

The recommended, and preferredcommunity solution was the design of twomulti-lane roundabouts on SR 9, with athin median in between to restrict leftturns. The bridge over Vickery Creek wasreplaced with two separate structures and aT-intersection on SR 9 to connect the tworoadways. This eliminated the need towiden the bridge over the Chattahoochee,which was a substantial cost saving.

The project has gone through reviewsof design constructability and in particular,roundabout design feasibility. Minor adjust-ments will be made to the concept design asit moves into preliminary design planpreparation, but the approved concept hasmet the project goals of achieving commu-nity support, removal of the reversible lanessystem and minimized impacts to the his-torical and environmental elements in theproject area. This project was in the con-strained TIA project list for $20 million andthe preliminary concept estimate was at $17million. Although alternate funding hasnot been identified, this project has over-come its historical challenges and now hasthe full support of the community and theCity Council.

31DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

Best Innovative Design: Ashford-Dunwoody Road Diverging Diamond Interchange, More-land-Altobelli. Pictured: Marlo Clowers (GDOT), Brad Hale (M-A), Bill Ruhsam (M-A), Rus-sell McMurry (GDOT), Shrujal Amin (M-A), Jennifer Harper (Perimeter CID), BuddyGratton (M-A)

Best Context Sensitive Design & Public Participation: Roswell Historic Gateway, Parsons-Brinckerhoff. Pictured: Terry Kazmerzak (P-B), Alice Wiggins (P-B), Rob Dell-Ross (Roswell),Steve Acenback (Roswell), Russell McMurry, Jonathan Reid (P-B), Valarie Birch (P-B)

Best ComplexUrban Design:Eagle’s LandingParkway, McGeePartnersPictured: Chae Yi(Henry Co.), ChrisMarsengill (McGee),Russell McMurry(GDOT), RoqueRomero (Henry Co.)

Best Bridge/Structural Design:Gainesville Pedes-trian Bridge, More-land-Altobelli.Pictured: BuddyGratton (M-A), Rus-sell McMurry(GDOT), Joe Mc-Grew (M-A)

V Best Innovative SolutionMoreland Altobelli Assoc.This innovative intersection reconstruc-tion solution was conceptualized, de-signed and constructed in a compressedtimeframe to address the traffic conges-tion problems on Ashford DunwoodyRoad. The afternoon commute, in partic-ular, was notorious for extensive delays fortraffic heading southbound to access I-285. PM peak hour traffic also experi-enced extensive queuing and pedestrianaccess was neither ADA-compliant nor aneasy proposition. In 2009, Moreland Al-tobelli was tasked to develop cost-effectivesustainable, cost-effective solutions for thegrowing area. The design team worked todevelop a plan and concept that wouldaddress the congestion issues while reduc-ing the cost of an interchange project tothe level of an operational improvement.

The determination was to convert theexisting partial cloverleaf interchange intoa diverging diamond interchange (DDI),used successfully in France for severaldecades. The first DDI in the US wasabout to open in Springfield Missouri.The first objectives were to use the exist-ing bridge to avoid the cost of replace-ment, avoid impacts to nearby businesses,malls, hotels and shopping centers, and tohelp create a DDI driver education effort.The aesthetics of the DDI were also ofgreat concern, as this project was envi-sioned as one of the gateways into thePCIDs and the City of Dunwoody. Land-scaping, lighting for the pedestrian walk-ways, unique signal elements allcontributed to the aesthetics.

Before this project, no one had de-signed or constructed a DDI in the south-east US, and extensive coordination wasneeded between the designer, the PCID,local governments, GDOT and FHWA.The coordination effort continuedthrough staging for construction to mini-mize traffic impacts.

The Ashford Dunwoody DDI proj-ect is an innovative solution to a prob-lem that occurs throughout metroAtlanta—how to get more capacity outof the existing infrastructure at minimalcost. Construction was fast with mini-mal impacts to the community. More-over, this DDI is a long-term,sustainable solution for this busy area. v

32 The GeorGia enGineer

W h a t ’ s i n t h e

N E W S

Robinson Associates Consulting Engi-neers is pleased to announce that Milan Jol-ley, P.E. has been named as Partner and VicePresident.  Mr. Jolley holds a Bachelor of Sci-ence in Civil Engineering from SouthDakota School of Mines and Technology anda Master of Science in Civil Engineeringfrom Iowa State University. He has been em-ployed at Robinson Associates ConsultingEngineers for the past eight years. Mr. Jolleywill continue to focus on design of newstructures while specializing in forensic eval-uation of structural drainage system. v

Mandatory Commissioning for AllBuildings Proposed for Green BuildingStandardCommissioning for all buildings designedand built under a green building standardfrom ASHRAE, the U.S. Green BuildingCouncil (USGBC) and the Illuminating En-gineering Society (IES) would becomemandatory under a new proposal open forpublic input.

ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard189.1-2011, Standard for the Design ofHigh-Performance, Green Buildings ExceptLow-Rise Residential Buildings, provides adesign standard for those who strive for highperformance buildings. It covers key topicalareas of site sustainability, water-use effi-ciency, energy efficiency, indoor environ-mental quality, and the building’s impact onthe atmosphere, materials, and resources.

Proposed addendum p would removethe ‘Acceptance Testing’ provision (Section10.3.1.1Building Acceptance Testing) forsmall buildings. The proposed addendumwas open for public review from Oct. 19-Nov. 18, 2012. To comment on the pro-posed changes or for more information, visitwww.ashrae.org/publicreviews.

Currently, the standard implies that

when a building area is less than 5,000square feet it is considered to have simplebuilding systems, and thus requires a reducedlevel of commissioning effort, referred to asAcceptance Testing, according to Jeff Ross-Bain, a member of the Standard 189.1 com-mittee. However, building area does notrelate to complexity as many buildings lessthan 5,000 square feet can be complex.

Under the proposed addendum, build-ing commissioning per Section 10.3.1.2 be-comes mandatory for all buildings that aredesigned and built under the requirementsof the standard.

“Commissioning is a robust and wellsupported discipline with established guide-lines (ASHRAE and others), a long historyof use and with many practitioners,” hesaid. “The commissioning process is onethat adapts to the specific attributes of agiven building. A ‘simple’ building wouldonly require ‘simple’ commissioning re-gardless of size.”

Ross-Bain noted that ‘Acceptance Test-ing’ is not a universally defined activity nor

do there appear to be specific instructions orguidelines within the industry detailing howthis activity is formally completed. Also, a re-view of the mandatory requirements of Stan-dard 189.1 could be interpreted asproducing a relatively complex building (i.e.consumption measurement, on-site renew-able energy, daylighting control, outdoor airdelivery monitoring, economizers, conden-sate recovery, etc.), which requires a higherdegree of commissioning activity.

Finally, under the current ‘AcceptanceTesting’ section, Standard 189.1 would notmeet the minimum commissioning prereq-uisite of the Leadership in Energy and Envi-ronmental Design (LEED) rating system,which requires all buildings to undergo thecommissioning process.

ASHRAE, founded in 1894, is a build-ing technology society with more than50,000 members worldwide. The society andits members focus on building systems, en-ergy efficiency, indoor air quality, refrigera-tion, and sustainability within the industry.Through research, standards writing, pub-

33DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

Wolverton & Associates Inc.Announces New Department HeadWolverton & Associates Inc. (W&A), a Pro-fessional Services Civil Engineering and LandSurveying firm located in Duluth, Georgiahas announced the promotion of Mr. ToddDeVos, P.E., PTOE, as their new departmenthead for the Traffic Engineering Department.

Mr. DeVos has his M.C.E. from theGeorgia Institute of Technology and has 24years of experience in traffic engineering. Hehas been with W&A for over five years in theTraffic Engineering Department. He holds aProfessional Engineering license in the stateof Georgia and also has his Professional Traf-fic Operations Engineer (PTOE) certificationin Georgia. He is professionally affiliatedwith the Institute of Transportation Engi-neers (ITE) and the Intelligent Transporta-tion Systems of Georgia (ITS).

Previously, Mr. DeVos was Senior Proj-ect Manager for W&A and has extensive ex-perience in transportation engineering andtransportation planning. His experience in-cludes managing signal timing plans andmodifications, signal design, traffic studies,and corridor and impact studies.

Chief Operating Officer, Joseph R. Mac-rina, P.E. stated, “We want to make sure thatwe have the best possible leadership in each ofour four major firm disciplines. In today’smarket we are not only looking for talentedengineers and project managers but also lead-ers with business development, people devel-opment, and project management skill sets.Mr. DeVos has proven he has the winningcombination of technical, management andleadership skills required to succeed.” v

lishing and continuing education, ASHRAEshapes tomorrow’s built environment today.v

GSFIC Retains Heery for CommissioningAssignment at Georgia TechHeery International has been awarded a con-tract with the Georgia State Financing andInvestment Commission (GSFIC) to pro-vide building commissioning services for anew engineered biosystems building (EBB)at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

The 200,000-square-foot multistory fa-cility will include labs, offices, classrooms,and associated support spaces. The buildingis being designed and constructed to achieveLEED Gold certification. Heery is respon-sible for commissioning mechanical, electri-cal, plumbing, fire protection,communication, and audio/visual systems.

The design and construction of theEBB will support growth in the areas of bio-science and biotechnology, allowing GeorgiaTech to remain at the forefront of researchin health and life systems.

The proposed site for the EBB is onTenth Street, within the block betweenTenth Street and Peachtree Place and be-tween State Street and Atlantic Drive. Thebuilding is envisioned as the first phase inthe development of the EBB complex. De-velopment of the EBB will align with thegoals outlined in Georgia Tech’s master planand campus landscape master plan. In addi-tion, the EBB development will address theplanned phase I of the eco-commons, theTenth Street streetscape, and the future de-velopment of the Atlantic promenade.

Heery International is an architecture,interior design, engineering, program man-agement, and construction managementfirm with offices nationwide. As an affiliatedcompany of Parsons Brinckerhoff, one of theworld’s leading professional services compa-nies, Heery now operates as that firm’s U.S.buildings operating company. v

Michael Buhler Joins Stantec in Duluth, GeorgiaBrings 35 year background in engineering andbusiness management Michael J. Buhler, PE, LEED AP, hasjoined Stantec as a principal in the firm’sDuluth, Georgia office where he will lead

land development and municipal engineer-ing services in the Atlanta area. Buhler has a35 year career in engineering and manage-ment of large engineering practices. He hasbeen involved with the design of major civilengineering projects for numerous munici-palities, developers throughout the UnitedStates, the federal government, includingthe Department of Defense, and state trans-portation departments

His extensive experience includes re-sponsibilities for design and management of,site development to support commercial, in-dustrial, and retail construction, ports, en-ergy, water infrastructure, and highways andbridges. Buhler is a registered professional en-gineer and a LEED (Leadership in Energyand Environmental Design) accredited pro-fessional. He is active in the Metro AtlantaChamber of Commerce and the Society ofAmerican Military Engineers.

Buhler holds a Bachelor of Science de-gree in Civil Engineering from Clarkson Uni-versity in New York.

He joins a growing multi-discipline en-gineering practice for Stantec in Georgia,where staff in Duluth and Macon provideservices in land development, municipal en-gineering, rail and transit engineering, road-way engineering, transportation, water, andurban infrastructure.

Stantec provides professional consultingservices in planning, engineering, architec-ture, interior design, landscape architecture,surveying, environmental sciences, projectmanagement, and project economics for in-

frastructure and facilities projects. We sup-port public and private sector clients in a di-verse range of markets at every stage, from theinitial conceptualization and financial feasi-bility study to project completion and be-yond. Our services are provided on projectsaround the world through approximately12,000 employees operating out of morethan 190 locations in North America andfour locations internationally. v

34 The GeorGia enGineer

very year in October, WTSAtlanta hosts their annualScholarship Luncheon inorder to honor scholarshipand award winners that haveexemplified outstanding

achievements in the field of transportation.The venue varies from year to year, but thisyear more than 300 professionals gathered atthe Georgia Aquarium to help WTS Atlantahonor the winners. A silent auction and raf-fle were conducted during the luncheonwhere nearly $7,500 was collected which willbe used to fund the scholarships that areawarded each year. Jennifer King, WTS At-lanta President, along with Inga Kennedy,served as MCs of the event, which includedentertainment from local musician, ‘Milk-shake.’ Once lunch was served, Dr. YvetteTaylor, with the Federal Transit Administra-tion, served as the key note speaker and dis-cussed current policy and issues concerningtransportation. Once complete, the scholar-ship and awards portion of the programbegan.

WTS Atlanta awards four scholarshipseach year to highly qualified college studentsthat meet the requirements set forth by WTSInternational. Two of the scholarships, Banksand Molitoris, are for undergraduate stu-dents, while the Overly and Legacy Scholar-ships are awarded to graduate students.While the pool of applicants was very strongthis year, the chapter chose the following stu-dents as the recipients of these awards: The$2,000 Sharon D. Banks UndergraduateScholarship was awarded to Atiyya Shaw.Atiyya was born in Guyana, South America,and moved to Marietta, Georgia, when shewas 11 years old. She attended the Centerfor Advanced Studies in Math, Science, andTechnology at Wheeler High School. She isa civil engineering student at Georgia Tech,where she is active in the Student Alumni As-sociation and Tau Beta Pi, and is currentlyan intern at CDM Smith.

Melissa Allardyce was selected to be therecipient of the Molitoris Leadership Schol-

arship for Undergraduates. Melissa is afourth-year Civil Engineering student atGeorgia Tech. She is vice president of Fi-nance for her sorority and is an active mem-ber of ASCE and ASHE. In addition,Melissa was a co-op in Economic Develop-ment at the Georgia Power Company andserved as vice president of Students of South-ern Company and student ambassador oncampus. Melissa is studying to get her cer-tificate in Land Development from theSchool of City and Regional Planning with afocus in Transportation Planning. Melissawill be recommended for the national Moli-toris Leadership Scholarship for Undergrad-uates at the WTS International Conferencein the spring of 2013.

The Helene M. Overly Graduate Schol-arship, worth $2,000, was awarded to Mar-garet Akofio-Sowah. She is a 2010 graduateof Smith College in Northampton and cur-rently enrolled in Georgia Tech pursuing a

degree in Transportation Systems Engineer-ing. She earned her Master’s degree last yearand is currently pursuing her PhD. At Geor-gia Tech, Margaret’s research is based ontransportation asset management as it relatesto planning and policy. Outside of academ-ics, Margaret is actively involved in the WTSstudent chapter at Georgia Tech and is cur-rently serving as president. She is also an ac-tive member of the Black Graduate StudentsAssociation and ITE.

The Leadership Legacy Scholarship forGraduates is one that is selected to be a rep-resentation of the Atlanta chapter at theWTS International Conference. This year’sLeadership Legacy Scholarship recipient is ayoung woman who, as an undergraduate stu-dent, won the Sharon D. Banks scholarship,then went on to win the national Banksaward in May of this year. Now, as a gradu-ate student, Amanda Wall stands out amongall of the applicants as one that is a very high

WTS Annual Scholarship Luncheon Goes Swimmingly Well

Jennifer King, Atiyya Shaw, and Jenny Jenkins

E

35DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

achiever and worthy of being recommendedas a potential national winner yet again.Amanda is from Hiram, Georgia and re-cently graduated with her BS in Civil Engi-neering from Georgia Tech, where shemaintained a 4.0 GPA throughout her entireundergraduate career. While at Tech,Amanda has educated others about alterna-tive transportation through her leadershiprole within Students for Progressive Transit,an organization she co-founded. Amanda iscurrently studying transportation systemsand policy at Georgia Tech and will graduatethis May with her Master’s degree. Althoughthere is no money associated with this schol-arship, she will be recommended to win thenational Banks award again this year for thechance to win $5,000.

After the scholarships were awarded tothe graduate and undergraduate college stu-dents, a $1,000 check was presented to the

Grady High School Robotics Team as part ofthe Transportation YOU Program. Trans-portation YOU is a joint initiative with theUSDOT that seeks to provide a hands-on,interactive, mentoring program that offersyoung girls ages 13-18 an introduction to awide variety of transportation careers. WTSAtlanta has committed itself as a chapter tothe Henry W. Grady Robotics & STEM Al-liance’s Grady Gearbox Gangstaz RoboticsTeam to support outreach efforts to middleand elementary schools, promote STEM in-terest among girls, and become ‘Big Sisters’to the students in order to mentor them.The Grady Gearbox Girlz brought theirrobot to the luncheon and wowed everyonewith its capabilities.

The last portion of the Annual Schol-arship luncheon included awarding de-serving recipients with the 2012 Awardsfor Employer, Member, Woman, and Di-

versity Members of the Year. These awardrecipients are nominated and voted on byfellow WTS Atlanta members prior to theluncheon.

For 2012, the Employer of the Year wasgiven to GeoStats, a woman-owned businessbased in Atlanta that focuses on the applica-tion of Global Positioning System (GPS) andGeographic Information Systems (GIS), inthe collection, analysis, reporting, and dis-play of transportation data. GeoStats has formany years been very involved in WTS At-lanta and this award is much deserved.

The Diversity Leadership Award, givento a person or organization who has exhib-ited outstanding and extraordinary efforts orinitiatives in developing opportunities forwomen and minorities, was awarded to Mar-sha Anderson Bomar of Stantec. Marsha hashelped pave the way for women in a male-dominated field and has served as a mentorto so many young professionals in the At-lanta area and throughout the nation.

Member of the Year this year was An-gela Snyder. Serving as the current Secretaryof WTS Atlanta, and project manager ofWolverton & Associates Inc., she strives toimprove communication within the organi-zation and grow the chapter. As the incom-ing president of the Atlanta Chapter, herhard work and passion for the mission ofWTS will continue to benefit the chapter.

Finally, Woman of the Year, wasawarded to Faye DiMassimo, the Director ofthe Cobb County DOT. Faye’s commitmentto the transportation industry and to the re-gion is typified by her efforts in the passingof the 2011 Cobb County SPLOST as wellas her work in securing the largest Alterna-tives Analysis competitive transit grant madein the state of Georgia and one of the largestin the nation. WTS Atlanta was proud to callFaye the Woman of the Year, as she has hadsuch a profound impact on the transporta-tion industry throughout her career as wellas on the lives of many young womenthrough her mentoring efforts.

WTS Atlanta would like to thank all ofits Corporate Partners and Luncheon Spon-sors and attendees for making the 2012WTS Atlanta Annual Scholarship Luncheona success! v

Key Note Speaker Dr. Yvette Taylor, RegionalAdministrator, Region IV Office of the Fed-

eral Transit Administrationscholarship recipient

Inga Kennedy, Helen McSwain, Grady HighSchool Gearbox Girlz, Jennifer King

36 The GeorGia enGineer

As winter approaches, the ASHE member-ship renewal period has ended, and I wantto thank all the ASHE members who haverenewed and welcome all of our new mem-bers. The ASHE membership is as strong asit has ever been and thanks to the wonderfulprograms put together by our programscommittee, our excellent social events or-

ganized by our social committee, and thehard work by our membership committeewe continue to grow.

In addition to our full membership, ournew ASHE student section is also growingstrong. We currently have over 25 new mem-bers and they have elected a student ASHEboard that is very energized and active.

The fall has brought us many greatASHE events, from bowling to two great‘standing room’ only lunch meetings. Thesewere highlighted by a very in depth presen-tation on the new MS4 requirements forGDOT projects and a great lesson on liabil-ity in highway design by Dr. Parsonson. Inaddition to our general meetings, ASHE par-ticipated in the Kaiser PermanenteRun/Walk at Turner Field and thanks tosome very generous sponsors, we were ableto enjoy great food, drinks, and companyafter the race. Another great program thathas had an overwhelming success is the InRoads Users Group that meets every month.InRoads users from GDOT, local cities andCounties as well as consultants have beenable to come together and share great ideasand help overcome any of the new software’schallenges.

Another piece of exciting news is thatASHE is working closely with our colleaguesat ITE to hold our first joint ITE/ASHEWinter Conference. The conference is sched-uled for February 24-25 at the University ofGeorgia Continuing Education ConferenceCenter in Athens. As the program is evolv-ing, it will be sure to be a great opportunityto collaborate, learn, and socialize.

Scholarship WinnersThrough our continued success at our GolfTournament and our other events, ASHE wasfortunate to be able to award two more stu-dents with our 2012 Jim McGee ASHEScholarship. Mellissa Allardyce and David Pe-ters were the winners.  Both students haveoutstanding academic, work, and extracur-ricular records and both students also ex-pressed a strong interest in continuing towork in the transportation field after theygraduate. Congratulations to Mellissa andDavid.

We have a full calendar of events in-cluding our new ITE/ASHE Winter Confer-ence, so check the Web site, www.ashega.org,regularly for what’s coming up.

We look forward to seeing you soon.v

AsHeNews

Ron Osterloh, P.E., PresidentAmerican Society of Highway Engineers / Georgia Section

Officer InstallationsOfficer installations were held in June, andthree new board members were added. The2012-2013 ASHE Georgia Section officers are:

President ~ Ron Osterloh, Pond & CompanyFirst Vice President ~ Michael Bywaletz,Gresham Smith and PartnersSecond Vice President ~ Brian O’Connor,Gresham Smith and PartnersSecretary ~ Karyn Matthews, GDOTTreasurer ~ Richard Meehan, LoweEngineersPast President and Regional Rep ~ TimMatthews, GDOTDirector ~ Shawn Fleet, Heath and LinebackNational Director ~ Nikki Reutlinger, Atkins

ChairsNominating Committee Chair ~ TimMatthews, GDOTProgram Chair ~ Rob Dell-Ross, city ofRoswellMembership Chair ~ Scott Jordan, CobbCountyScholarship Chair ~ Sarah Worachek,Gresham Smith and PartnersASHE Student Chapter Liason ~ KevinRiggs, Gresham Smith and PartnersTechnical Chairs ~ Dan Bodycomb,AECOM; Chris Rudd, GDOTCommunications Chair ~ Jenny Jenkins,McGee PartnersSocial Chair ~ Elizabeth Scales, ThompsonEngineeringGolf Tournament Chair ~ Ashley Chan,HNTBWeb site Chairs ~ Mindy Sanders, HatchMott MacDonald; Pervez Iqbal, HNTB

The Coveted ASHE Bowling Trophy,Closely Watched by Rob Dell-Ross

CALENDAR OF EVENTS

December 5, 2012ASHE Holiday Social

January, 2013General Meeting

February 24-25, 2013ITE/ASHE Winter Conference

(Athens, Georgia)March 2013

Poker Tourney April 2013

General Meeting May 2013

Golf & Tennis Tourneys

Government Affairs for ConsultingEngineers: It’s Not Just aboutWashington DCIf you are scanning this article for speculationon the impact of the November elections, youwill be disappointed because the election isstill a few days away as this article is beingwritten. I recently bumped into an acquain-tance of mine, a well-known and often-quoted economics professor. Even though heopenly discusses his political views and has nomotivation to show ‘balance,’ he told me, thatin his opinion, the economy is likely to im-prove no matter who is elected. So, if your guydid not win, maybe there is hope!

The presidential election has certainlyoccupied our attention for many months. Iam sure that you, like me are ready to moveon and get back to improving business con-ditions for our places of employment and theclients we serve. The focus of government af-fairs for most of us in the engineering busi-ness is far from the presidential level.Government issues at the state and local lev-els have much more immediate impact onour business lives.

Don’t you think it is an odd paradoxthat we engineers tend to be fiscally conser-vative, frequently speaking energetically infavor of smaller government, less regulation,and budget cuts, but, at the same time, ‘gov-ernment’ is often the driving force in themarkets in which we work? Many of usmake our living by designing projects in-tended to meet regulatory requirements forenvironmental protection, public safety, en-ergy conservation, and other mandates thatdid not exist until government regulationscame into existence. Public infrastructureprojects we design, and in some cases ourfees, are funded by government sponsored fi-

nancing. You could argue that governmenthas made the consulting engineering busi-ness possible. To me that suggests we can fur-ther enhance our business interests and thepublic benefit by promoting improvementsin state and local laws and encouraging theadoption of sensible regulation and policy.

Here in Georgia, ACEC/G has hadsome significant successes in government af-fairs this year. We played a key role withGAWP, GMA, ACCG, and the State Cham-ber in working out expedited permitting forwastewater projects. The ACEC/G Environ-mental Forum developed language for thenew policy statement that allows ProfessionalEngineering certification to replace pro-longed construction plan review by EPD,while at the same time providing liabilityprotection in cases where construction is notsatisfactory, or operation is inconsistent withthe approved operating procedure.

In the Transportation arena, a newGeorgia Partnership for TransportationQuality (GPTQ) operational charter has

been signed. This partnership agreement be-tween GDOT, the Georgia Highway Con-tractors Association, and ACEC/G, willenhance the quality and efficiency of futuretransportation projects in the state of Geor-gia for years to come. The public and thebusiness community will benefit greatly.

There is another side of the impact ofgovernment on our business that is also partof government affairs. We can provide betterservice to our clients if we are not burdenedby inefficient policies and regulations. En-gineers like solving problems and we wouldrather earn our fees by solving problems thanby managing cumbersome red-tape issues.Even when our firms are serving industrialor private clients and our projects are notfunded by government programs, govern-ment regulations impact how we operate.

I believe that engineers have a better un-derstanding of most issues, both technicaland non-technical than the typical citizen.So how do we influence government to cor-rect the problems that hinder efficiency in

37DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

Edgar G. Williams, PEPresident ACEC/G

ACeCNews

38 The GeorGia enGineer

our problem solving endeavors? For most ofus starting an ‘Occupy’ movement wouldnot fit our style very well. Expressing ouropinions individually can be risky and inef-fective. Engineers employed in the privatesector often walk a fine line in dealing withclients and are unable to openly take a polit-ical position. I have seen recent articles thatadvocate engineers running for office. Howabout running for office? Serving in anelected position, while also working in con-sulting engineering, can be very difficult. Youhave to overcome the challenges of balanc-ing your time, determining what is ‘conflictof interest’ and convincing the public of yourobjectivity. We have a few examples of Geor-gia engineers who have done this successfully.I applaud their dedication and commitment.

Our participation in ACEC/G providesa very effective mechanism for making ouropinions known and sharing our valuable in-sight into the issues important to engineersand the state. ACEC/G provides advocacyand information in a way that maximizes theoutcomes and minimizes the individual costsand risks. I know the cumulative dollars ofour PACs have much more impact than myindividual contributions. Contributing tothe national PAC as an individual and sup-porting the state PAC with business contri-butions allows us to greatly increase thevolume of our unified voice. Our ACEC/Gnational office provides a venue to stay in-formed about what national legislation andregulation is under consideration and to con-nect with the federal agencies that are im-

portant to us here at home. ACEC/G pro-vides strength in numbers and a much moreeffective voice for our interests at the localand federal level than we can produce indi-vidually.

Additionally, we have the benefit of theGeorgia Engineering Alliance (GEA), a coali-tion of multiple engineering associationswith the potential to convey a very crediblecomprehensive message. The vision for GEAhas not changed with the reorganizationcompleted last fall. The reorganization is in-tended to broaden the base of participationby including more of the many engineeringassociations active in Georgia. Many organ-izations will be more credible than just ahandful. This unified voice of engineers willbe able to more effectively advocate for com-mon issues. ACEC/G and GEA provide themeans for Georgia engineers to leverage oureffectiveness for positive impact in govern-ment affairs, right here in Georgia. v

Read articles on-line at:THEGEORGIAENGINEER.

39DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

AsCeNews

Lisa S. Woods, P.E., PresidentAmerican Society of Civil Engineers, Georgia Section | e-mail: lisa.woods@jacobs.com | www.ascega.org

PresidentLisa S. Woods, P.E.JACOBSlisa.woods@jacobs.com

President-Elect Katherine McLeod Gurd, P.E.AECOMKatherine.Gurd@aecom.com

Vice President Rebecca Shelton, P.E.Gwinnett County DWRrebecca.shelton@gwin-nettcounty.com

Treasurer Dan Agramonte, P.E.O'BRIEN & GEREdaniel.agramonte@obg.com

External Director Keith Cole, P.E.keith.cole@mindspring.com Internal Director Christina Vulova, P.E.URS Corporationchristina.vulova@urs.com

Secretary Ernie Pollitzer, MS P.E.Sierra Piedmont

epollitzer@bellsouth.net

Technical Director Richard Morales, M.Sc., P.E. LB Foster Piling RMorales@LBFoster.com

Younger Member DirectorJulie Secrist, P.E.Lowe EngineersJulie.Secrist@loweengineers.com

Savannah Branch Director C. J. Chance

NE Georgia Branch Director Matthew Tanner, P.E.Breedlove Land Planning Inc. mtanner@landplanning.net

South Metro Branch DirectorGreg A. Wombough, P.E.Universal Engineering Sciencesgwombough@universalengi-neering.com

Past-PresidentJames R. Wallace, Sc.D., P.E.AMEC (retired)jrwhaw@comcast.net

ASCE/GEORGIA SECTION 2012 - 2013 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Greetings! This is the YEAR OF FUN inASCE. At our meeting November 2 every-body was encouraged to wear their favoritecollegiate gear! Look for some photos in thenext issue! And hold onto your hats for someother FUN events throughout the year!

Engineers Week is fast approaching—Febru-ary 17-23! Please check our website for vol-unteer opportunities!

Centennial CelebrationsAs 2012 comes to a close, we are wrappingup our Centennial Activities.Centennial GalaWe celebrated our Centennial with a spec-tacular gala at the Georgia Tech Hotel andConference Center on September 7, 2012.Comedian and Motivational Speaker DanJourdan served as master of ceremonies.Reginald DesRoches, PhD, Chair of theSchool of Civil & Environmental Engineer-ing, welcomed the over 120 attendees.

Melissa Wheeler and Katherine Gurd,

PE provided a picture-filled presentationshowing 100 years of civil engineering inGeorgia and unveiled the book ASCE Geor-gia 1912-2012: Celebrating 100 Years of En-gineering Excellence. Fourteen PastPresidents of Georgia ASCE were presentand recognized.

National ASCE President Andrew Her-rmann, PE, SECB was the guest speaker,speaking on infrastructure needs in theUnited States. Ernie Pollitzer, PE presentedawards including:• Young Civil Engineer of the Year: Gre-

gory L. Hebeler, PhD, PE of GolderAssociates

• Georgia Outstanding Civil Engineer-ing Achievement Natural Environ-ment: Browns Canal StreambankRestoration, city of Valdosta

• Georgia Outstanding Civil Engineer-ing Achievement Small Project: RMClayton Water Reclamation CenterCo-generation Project, city of Atlanta

• Georgia Outstanding Civil Engineer-

ing Achievement Large Project: YellowRiver Water Reclamation Facility Im-provements, Gwinnett County De-partment of Water Resources

• Honorable Mention Awards went tothe Chattahoochee Raw Water Trans-mission Line, DeKalb County Depart-ment of Watershed Management;Borinquen Dam, Pacific Access Chan-nel, Panama Canal Authority; and EastSwift Creek Mitigation Bank, Mitiga-tion Resource Group.

The evening ended with the installation ofthe 2012-2013 Board of Directors and pass-ing of the gavel from Jim Wallace, PhD, PEto me! A raffle of Atlanta Falcons tickets do-nated by CH2M Hill raised over $500 forthe ASCE Georgia Scholarship Fund. Theevent was an outstanding commemorationof 100 years of ASCE in Georgia.

Centennial Commemorative BookWe have released a book celebrating 100

40 The GeorGia enGineer

years of engineering excellence in Georgia.The book showcases 31 unique projects thatforever changed Georgia. Written from theunique perspective provided by civil engi-neers, the book celebrates civil engineeringin Georgia by highlighting significant proj-ects. In coinciding with the Georgia sec-tion’s centennial (1912 - 2012), the projectsare intertwined with major events that oc-curred during the time period, such asWorld War II, the 1996 Atlanta OlympicGames, and the growth of Georgia’s popula-tion from 2.5 million to nearly ten million.

The commemorative edition featuresover 90 photographs, including manyunique and historical images that offer in-sight into the growth of Georgia in the last100 years. The book spotlights significantachievements such as construction of thetallest hotel in the western hemisphere(Westin Peachtree Plaza), the world’s busiestairport (Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Interna-tional Airport), and the fourth-busiest portin the United States (Port of Savannah).The book was written mainly by GeorgiaSection ASCE members.

Development of the book was spear-headed by the ASCE Georgia Section Cen-tennial Committee, which was led byMelissa Wheeler, A.M.ASCE and KatherineMcLeod Gurd, P.E., M.ASCE. The team

spent countless hours digging through oldrecords and documents to put this historicbook together. All team members con-tributed to the development of this book,which we feel is representative of the enor-mous impact that civil engineers have madeto Georgia’s growth during this time period.Get Your Copy! Pick up your copy at an up-coming Section meeting, or online at:http://www.ascega.org/georgia-asce-centennial-book/.

Volunteer OpportunitiesWe have many volunteer opportunities toget YOU involved throughout the year. Our‘What Do Civil Engineers Do?’ contest urgeskids to be creative and offers cash prizes!

We are so excited to be partnering withSTEM (Science, Technology, Engineering,and Mathematics) schools around Georgiawhere we participate in workshops and edu-cation—our schools so far—Marietta Cen-ter for Academic Achievement (MCAA),Marietta Middle School (MMS), and Lib-erty Elementary in Canton.

The Exploring Engineering Academy atGeorgia Tech in June is an awesome programput together by the Boy Scouts and champi-oned by Richard Morales for many years!

Some of our Engineers Week activitiesinclude Toothpick Bridge Building led by

Larry Prescott and Introduce a Girl to Engi-neering led by John Lawrence and MelissaWheeler.

We also participate with GSPE in Math-counts and for the last several years, we haveparticipated in the SkillsUSA Career Expo atthe convention center near Hartsfield.

Please contact our Director of ExternalAffairs, Keith Cole, at keith.cole@mind-spring.com to volunteer!

Remember…Please join us at one of our Section meetingsthis year! January 4, February 1, March 1,April 5, May 3, and June 7. Please check outour new Web site, www.ascega.org, for moreinformation. New this year!! – We will beholding raffles at select meetings for itemslike Falcons tickets, etc. Please bring cash.All money collected goes directly to ourScholarship Fund. We are also looking foritems to raffle if you or your company wouldlike to donate.

I would like to extend a sincere thankyou to our sponsors—RWC Hardscapes,Belgard Hardscapes, JACOBS, HaywardBaker, AECOM, Heath and Lineback,ASCE Region 5, ASCE Foundation and LBFoster, and Evonik. Please contact me if youare interested in becoming a sponsor.

In closing, please e-mail me at any timeif you have questions, concerns, suggestions,or would like to volunteer! Many thanks toRebecca Shelton and Dan Agramonte forcontributing to this article! Take care andhave a Merry Christmas and Happy NewYear! v

Representatives of LB Foster Pose with President Andrew Herrmann

Book Contributors Celebrate

Installation of the 2012-2013 ASCE Georgia Section Board of Directors

41DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

GsPeNews

David W. Simoneau, P.E.,. President Georgia Society of Professional Engineers

On October 6, 2012, I had the good fortuneto recognize one of the most significant mile-stones in our profession. The Georgia Soci-ety of Engineers hosted a New PERecognition dinner to honor those men andwomen who had successfully completed therequired experience and passed the second ofthe two tests necessary to become Profes-sional Engineers in Georgia. Together withour sponsors, Georgia Power, ASCE,ACEC/G, SEAOG, LOC Engineering,Pond & Company, Wolverton & Associates,GEC Engineers, and W.K. Dickson, we wereable to say, “Well done!”

This amazing accomplishment deservedand received our heartfelt congratulations.The inspired presentations of our speakersmade attending this dinner more than worthyour time. Ron Scinta, PE, the young engi-neer speaker, was an excellent choice for thatpresentation because he had waited sometime before finally seeking his professionalregistration. His success shows the potentialfor everyone who wants to progress. Ourolder engineers were represented by JohnPrien, PE who gave us many reminders ofwhere we have been and where we can goagain. As a special show of honor, our fea-tured speaker was Dan Wittliff, PE, Presi-dent of the National Society of Engineers.While the national society tries to havemembers of the senior staff attend a meetingin every state at least once a year, we were ex-tremely grateful that Dan could be in Atlantafor this special presentation. Dan’s atten-dance demonstrates that he wants this pro-fession and all of its members to be the best.

While the celebration was wonderful, itis not truly the emphasis of this article. It ishowever what made me remember what itwas like when I became a professional engi-neer. We all need to remember why we are

where we are in our careers. What broughtyou to this point? Where do you plan to go?Those questions are asked by everyone at onetime or another. If you are like me, youcame to this point because you wanted tocreate things that improve the welfare of oth-ers. I enjoy looking at a bare piece of landand thinking about what it will become afterI create the plans for the proposed develop-ment, get it approved by the local jurisdic-tion, and the contractor builds it. I evenenjoy watching the creation of the other dis-ciplines’ designs as they are constructed. Iwant the project to be completed and to bedone properly. So I came to this place in mycareer because I enjoy making things betterfor those around me.

Where do we go from here? Engineersshould “Conduct themselves honorably, re-sponsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to en-hance the honor, reputation, and usefulnessof the profession.” This quote from theCode of Ethics for Engineers points out thatour driving force should be honor. If we acthonorably, we will only work in our areas ofexpertise. We will admit our mistakes. Wewill not make misleading statements. Inother words, we will follow the Code ofEthics. As one of those who have beenaround for awhile, I have an obligation tohelp train those that are coming behind me.That is why I am sold on the idea of theGeorgia Society of Professional Engineers. Itprovides a framework to promote and pro-tect the profession for future generations.While I want to train the younger engineersin my office to be better at the technical partof their designs, I also want to show themhow to be honorable. As my company pres-ident says, “If there is time to do it over, therewas time to do it right.” That entails notonly making it technically correct, but prop-

erly designing the project with the higheststandards of honesty and integrity. In thelong run, honor will win.

Join with us to point the way for ourupcoming engineers. If the engineers oftoday maintain the highest standard ofhonor in all of their dealings with others, theprofession will benefit, and we will create afuture that everyone will enjoy. As the newengineers were honored at our recent dinner,they also started a journey that puts them inpositions of leadership, not only for the proj-ects they design, but also for the younger en-gineers who have yet to advance to theposition of professional engineer. It is thebeginning of a new cycle for the future of en-gineering. v

42 The GeorGia enGineer

iteNews

Dwayne Tedder, PEGeorgia Section, Institute of Transportation Engineers

2012 President’s messageBy Dan DobryI love coaching. Those that regularly coachlittle league, rec soccer, Upward basketball,flag football, or whatever sport probablyagree with me. For me, it is like I get to playthose sports all over again but without thepulled hammy. The camaraderie, the thrill ofvictory, the agony of defeat … all of that.Love it!

I’ve been coaching for 16 years—some-where in the neighborhood of 35 to 40teams, multiple sports and hundreds of boysand girls ranging in ages from three to 19. Itoccurs to me that over this time period, Ihave learned more about professional leader-ship from those kids than I could ever learnin a classroom, book, or seminar. I thoughtI’d share five leadership lessons I’ve learnedfrom coaching kids.

1. Be clear about your objectives. Mark, Jrwas a smallish, stocky kid, who had akeen sense for the game of indoor soc-cer. Because I was determined to teachfour and five year olds proper position-ing, I told Mark where his defensivespot was and told him that if a ball cameinto his area, he should kick it away. Forthe first half of the game, little Mark du-tifully glued himself to his one spot and

43DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

Board Position Member E-mail PhonePresident John Karnowski jkarnowski@foresitegroupinc.com (770) 368-1399

Vice President Dwayne Tedder dwayne.tedder@urs.com (678) 808-8840

Secretary/Treasurer Jonathan Reid Reid@pbworld.com (404) 769-4058

Past President Mike Holt mholt@worldfiber.com (770) 407-7799

District Representative David Benevelli david.benevelli@transcore.com (770) 246-6257

District Representative Carla Holmes carla_holmes@gspnet.com (678) 518-3654

District Representative Jim Tolson jtolson@dot.ga.gov (404) 624-7119

Affiliate Director Andrew Antweiler aantweiler@roswellgov.com (678) 639-7540

Committee Chair(s) E-mail Phone2012 Intl Meeting Marsha Bomar marsha.andersonbomar@stantec.com (770) 813-0882

Kenny Voorhies kvoorhies@camsys.com (404) 460-2604

Activities Patrick McAtee PMcatee@ThompsonEngineering.com (404) 574-1985

Annual Report Carla Holmes carla_holmes@gspnet.com (678) 518-3654

Jim Tolson jtolson@dot.ga.gov (404) 624-7119

Audio/Visual France Campbell france_campbell@gspnet.com (678) 518-3952

Awards/Nominations Mike Holt mholt@worldfiber.com (770) 407-7799

Career Guidance Brendetta Walker bhargro@bellsouth.net (404) 364-5235

Clerk Elizabeth Scales elizabeth.scales@hatchmott.com (770) 200-1735

Comptroller Jim Pohlman pohlmanj@bellsouth.net (770) 972-9709

Engineers Week Steven Sheffield ssheffield@georgiatolls.com (404) 893-6132

Finance Martin Bretherton wbretherton@hntb.com (404) 946-5709

Georgia Engineer Magazine Dan Dobry ddobry@croyengineering.com (770) 971-5407

John Edwards jdedwards4929@bellsouth.net (404) 264-0789

Georgia Tech Liaison Paul DeNard pdenard@dot.ga.gov (404) 635-8278

Historian Charles Bopp charles_bopp@hotmail.com (404) 848-6054

Host Sujith Racha sujith.racha@arcadis-us.com (770) 431-8666

Legislative Affairs Bill Ruhsam bruhsam@maai.net (678) 728-9076

Life Membership Don Gaines dgaines@gcaeng.com (404) 355-4010

Marketing Shannon Fain shannon.fain@stantec.com (770) 813-0882

Membership Sunita Nadella sunita.nadella@parsons.com (678) 969-2304

Monthly Meetings Dwayne Tedder dwayne.tedder@urs.com (678) 808-8840

Newsletter Vern Wilburn vwilburn@wilburnengineering.com (770) 977-8920

Past Presidents Todd Long tlong@dot.ga.gov (404) 631-1021

Public Officials Education Scott Mohler scott_mohler@urscorp.com (678) 808-8811

Scholarship Tim Brandstetter tim.brandstetter@kimley-horn.com (404) 419-8714

Southern Poly Liaison Bryan Sartin bryan_sartin@gspnet.com (678) 518-3884

Summer Seminar Josh Williams josh_williams@gspnet.com (678) 518-3672

Technical Winter Horbal winter.horbal@temple-inc.com (678) 412-5554

Web site Shawn Pope spope@camsys.com (404) 460-2609

Winter Workshop Jody Peace Jody.Peace@arcadis-us.com (770) 431-8666

acted like a pinball bumper if a ball wereto perchance hit his legs. Me being theastute coach that I am, explained toMark that he could move back and forthin the defensive zone and didn’t have tojust stand in one spot. So, for the entire

second half he sashayed side-to-side andkicked the ball if it happened to cometo him in his proper pendulum motion.After that, I was a little clearer withMark on where he should play.

2. Celebrate the little things as well as the

big things. Angel wanted to be part ofthe team. She liked it when her momput her hair up for the game andthought shin guards were cool. Truth-fully, she really liked the post-gamesnacks. But Angel, as far as I could tell,

44 The GeorGia enGineer

had no athletic ability whatsoever—bless her heart. I spent most games inthe early part of the season encouragingAngel not to eat her hair. But on one oc-casion, it all seemed to click for Angel,and she ran around doing exactly whatshe was told. It seemed silly to praise herfor not picking her nose but it was thekind of encouragement she needed. Inthe last game of the second season, shescored a goal… and the crowd wentwild!

3. Empathize. My then seven year oldRachel was tiny but tenacious. As a de-fender, she exploded to the ball andrarely let a forward get the better of her.As a goalie, she was fearless… until…The opposing forward was one of thosefast growth-spurt kids who towered overeveryone else. (I’m pretty sure she was aDominican 12-year old with a fake birthcertificate, but I couldn’t prove it.) Thegirl orchestrated a fast break and was setto score. Rachel aggressively challengedher and ran directly at her. The Amazonkicked hard and lifted the ball right intoRachel’s face from about ten feet away. Itbounced to the side; she steadied herselfand took up her position, seemingly un-fazed by the ball-to-the-nose shot. Thesame kid readied her return kick andfrom six feet away nailed Rachel in theface again. Somehow she was able tocorral the ball and throw it away. Onlythen did she drop to ground. When Iwent to make sure she was okay, theonly thing she said was, “Daddy, I don’twant to play goalie, anymore.” – Shedidn’t.

4. Know when you need help. I have al-ways coached my kids’ teams… always.It is one way I get to stay active in theirlives and lets me yell life affirming di-rections from the sidelines. One season,the age differences got the better of meand we had three kids playing on threedifferent teams. Based on the schedules,it was impossible for me to coach allthree teams. I had to let someone else doit. My middle child had a wonderfulcoach who was also the youth leader for

the church where we played. I saved mylife affirming directions for the car ridehome.

5. Coach yourself out of a job. One of myproudest moments as a coach is whenthe kids ‘get it’ and can essentially coachthemselves. I called all the plays for thefirst three-quarters of our football sea-son. Eventually, the quarterbacks had agood sense for the situation at hand andcalled their own plays. We won everygame that season. That might have hadsomething to do with the fact that wehad the oldest, fastest, and biggest kidsin the league but I like to believe it wasthe play calling and execution.

In business, as well as in our professional or-ganizations, we have plenty of opportunitiesto lead. We may not all be bosses, uppermanagement, or presidents but we can all beleaders of some variety. (1) Make sure every-one knows what is expected of the team. (2)When they hit the mark, even if only in asmall way, make a big deal of that accom-plishment. (3) Put yourself in their positionand be ready to step in and change things ifit isn’t working out. (4) Don’t be afraid to askfor help from others. (5) And finally, beready to pass the reins to someone else butmake sure you prepare them for it.

Dwayne Tedder… it’s all yours.

45DECEMBER | JANUARY 2013

An innovation in safety and efficiency iscoming to Interstate 285 in 2014, and ITSGeorgia member organizations are at theheart of the new driving experience that,proven successful, may become the norm formetropolitan Georgia freeways in the future.

The concept is simple—utilize technol-ogy to vary the real-time speed limit to im-prove traffic flow and create safer drivingconditions. Reducing speeds and harmoniz-ing the flow of traffic upstream of an inci-dent makes for safer driving conditions andideally prevents secondary accidents thatarise from stop-and-go conditions.

As part of the program, the overall speedlimit will be raised to 65 MPH for the260,000 or so daily vehicles on I-285, withthe variable speed limit zone encompassingthe northern section from I-20 in the east toI-20 in the west. Depending on traffic con-ditions, the speed limit will be adjusted upor down in five-MPH increments.

“You’re able to move more trafficthrough with the variable sign system,”GDOT Commissioner Keith Golden toldthe Atlanta Journal-Constitution. “If you’llslow down, you’ll actually get there faster,”Commissioner Golden said, quoting traf-fic reporter Herb Emory of News TalkWSB radio.

The technology behind the system is de-veloped by ITS Georgia member Atkins and

Scott Mohler, P.E.ITS President

its News

Our 2012 Sponsors

TempleArcadis

Gresham Smith and PartnersTraficonAtkins

World Fiber TechnologiesSerco

UtilicomSouthern Lighting and Traffic

SystemsURS

Kimley-Horn and AssociatesControl Technologies

TelventDelcan

Cambridge SystematicsStantec

Grice ConsultingSensys Networks

Daktronics

PresidentScott Mohler, URS Corporation

Immediate Past PresidentMarion Waters, Gresham, Smith andPartners

Vice PresidentTom Sever, Gwinnett DOT

SecretaryKristin Turner, Wolverton and Associates Inc.

TreasurerChristine Simonton, Delcan

DirectorsMark Demidovich GDOT Susie Dunn ARCKenn Fink Kimley-HornEric Graves City of Alpharetta John Hibbard AtkinsCarla Holmes Gresham SmithPatrece Keeter DeKalb CountyKeary Lord Douglas County

DOT Bayne Smith URSGrant Waldrop GDOT

State Chapters RepresentativeKenny Voorhies Cambridge

Systematics Inc.Ex OfficioGreg Morris Federal Highway

AdministrationJamie Pfister Federal Transit

Administration

ITS GEORGIA CHAPTER LEADERSHIP

Changes coming to I-285

is called Advanced Traffic Demand Manage-ment (ATDM). The ATDM system, man-aged at GDOT’s TransportationManagement Center senses conditions on I-285 and then calculates the optimum speedper segment to move the most vehicles, themost efficiently.

“Atkins is honored to work with GDOTand bring our worldwide ATDM resourcesto bear on this important project,” said JohnHibbard, Atkins ITS Practice Manager andlongtime ITS Georgia board member.

ITS Georgia member Brooks-Berry-Haynie was selected to handle the hardwareand installation of the system. BBH project

manager Bill Gunter knows it is high-profileand important for the state and region.

“Variable Speed Limit Systems are a firstfor Georgia and therefore need a team thatis up for the challenge. Brooks-Berry-Haynielooks forward to bringing our expertise inITS and working with our design team,Atkins, to deliver this project to GDOT ontime and on budget,” Bill said.

We look forward to keeping you up-dated on progress and results once the sys-tem is in place. To find out more about ITSGeorgia members who are on the forefrontof safety, innovation and efficiency in Geor-gia scan the QR, or visit http://itsga.org/our-members.html.

2012 Annual Meeting Follow Up I mentioned last time that I felt our 2012 an-nual meeting at Callaway Gardens was a suc-cess. Well we verified that with an attendeesurvey. Of those taking the survey, 45 per-cent said the meeting exceeded expectationswith 52 percent indicating the meeting metexpectations. Eighty-three percent rated thevendor exhibits as excellent, with 69 percentindicating the meeting contained the rightbalance of networking, sessions and vendortime allocation. Ninety percent of attendees

indicated they wanted to hold the conferenceat Callaway in 2013, so we’ll see you in PineMountain next year. v

46 The GeorGia enGineer

Use A ComPAny

yoU CAn trUst witH yoUr

trAnslAtion ProjeCt,

because a little mistake

in another language

can have unpleasant results.

“Gort! Klaatu Borada nikto.”

(770) 521-8877

Take a look at our new and improved Web site:

Enjoy a new video every day.

THEGEORGIAENGINEER.

GeorgiaEngineerthe

http://www.georgiapower.com./AandE

http://www.haywardbaker.com